This might be controversial (no clue if it is), but I think generic boss monsters should ALWAYS be outclassed by archetypal boss monsters. makes things less samey by stengthening archetype influence & gives you a reason to play a deck.
The problem with that is that then it makes one archetype better than another which is not what anyone wants. The best thing to do is to split the generic cards into multiple cards some of which could be archetype based but others which would be attribute and type etc. There shouldn't be any 100% generic cards but they also shouldn't be completely locked down unless their effect would be so powerful you need to balance it by attaching it to a relatively weak deck. Synchro Zoroa for the Magistus is a perfect example of this. Magistus can easily spam the board full in a turn (especially if you combine it with even something like Dark Magician like I do). The thing is this deck doesn't have a bunch of negates or protection by default in-archetype. It has two once per turn destruction protections and one of those has to be in the graveyard. Giving it the ability to floodgate ED monsters would be overly powerful but the rest of the deck and locking its effects to requiring Magistus monsters balances it. BODE is a perfect example of a set where someone knows what they're doing but clearly not everyone. Zoroa can even reborn itself like DPE but you need to destroy another Magistus monster to do so. Imagine how much use DPE would see if you needed to destroy or even remove from play a Destiny Hero to reborn him like Zoroa. The problem is that Konami, like most people and people run things, only understands short-term money making. Releasing one generic card for everything gets you hype and short-term big money, while if you release 160 different versions of the same card for different archetypes and types and whatever and you'd make much more money in the long run. It would also make the game a little more interesting because they don't have to be the exact same effects. You can have a machine Zeus and a spellcaster Zeus in that the card can ultimately send everything to the graveyard but the specifics could and probably should be different for variety and lore.
I feel these generic extra deck monsters that are actually part of an archetype should have a very poweful effect reliant on the archetype. For example, accesscode talker has 2 very poweful effects. If it had to use a codetalker monster for either (not both) the attack boost or the pop, it would at least feel more attached to the archetype while still being generic.
I like this idea. Number 90 is good example of this type of thing. It is a generic rank 8 with a monster negate, but you only get the full benefits by playing it in galaxy-eyes.
We should go back to the era where fusion monsters need specific fusion summon to get them to the field. Link monsters destroyed the fun interactions we once had with yugioh.
This is a take I agree on so much. It's so boring to end on generic boards and cards like Baronne, Borreload Savage and Accesscode, while probably good for the game, are the one thing I dislike the most. Generic stuff should just help a deck to get to their end board, not *be* the end board
Exactly, this should be always the final result, a little help, not the final board. This tends to make the game even more broken in every way, because, then, everyone tends to be running Kaijus, just a Lava Golem, a Gameciel and a Lightning Storm in hand solves the board
I agree. I love salamangreat but it bums me out that pretty much my only win condition is accescode(before it was borrelsword). If I don't have him in my deck then I'm at a huge disadvantage, I wish salamangreat had better archetype specific boss monsters.
Absolutely agree with you in how a lot of these generic boss monsters makes decks lose their identity. I play more in master duel and in ranked, you always see Barrone, Pred into DPE, Acesscode Talker, etc. and it gets very stale and boring after having to face it so many duels in a row. I find duels much more fun when I’m going against a a deck that sticks to a specific archetype, especially if it’s something I haven’t seen before.
i mean yeah i have some of these staples in there in case i go against annoying decks with big things to swing over…but i usually don’t use them unless it serves the purpose of removing their annoyances. I just wish i didnt HAVE to have them there.
my favorite thing is always seeing a generic card and trying to play it's own archetype (already done so with predaplants, code talkers, kaijus, crystron, crusadia, true king/draco, and am currently making a pure drytron deck) it's a neat way to learn about more archetypes and how the cards were INTENDED to be used. Also its just more fun playing cards that way
Accesscode Talker is a necessary evil to make a lot of rogue/casual decks semi-viable. I swear Altergeist is unplayable for me without it because their boss monster, Memorygant, is pretty bad even if it's a little easy to summon. But what's the point of summoning it? It's just a beatstick with a barely decent protection that only protects it from destruction effects. It's a worse version of Accesscode Talker that can pop any card without even having to enter BP (unlike Memorygant that's also limited to monster cards). And the worst thing is that Memorygant does not even interact with its own archetype...
if you like going up against archetype specific boss monsters then I have just the one for you. Ojamas! I know they are a total meme from the show but in reality they are a total PAIN in the backside to play against. A really good Ojama player going first can drop Ojama King and Ojama Knight on the field and good luck getting over that! Ojama Knight ( with Ojama Country field spell on the board of course) is so f*%ked up and annoying that it can make players rage quit. it is by far my fave pure archetype deck to play with lol
I agree. I haven’t played TCG in years, but through Master Duel, I’ve realized that it’s just different ways to get to the same 3 boards. Synchro negates, xyz negates or link negates. Like, why?
Generic boss monsters need substantial downsides to use their effects (i.e. discarding or tributing as cost, no Battle Phase this/next turn, etc.) That way you have to be smart about how you ration your disruptions outside of hard once-per-turns while offering incentive to use in-archetype bosses.
Problem is discard sometimes is a plus. Bt agreed. Generic boss monster need to have a cost or maybe make one of the effect like no usable unless use archetype cards as materials. Eg. Accesscode - cannot pop unless using code talker as material. Or sthing along that lines
Yeah I agree discard/send to the GY is out of the table. Banishing as cost can be a problem as well. You have to be specific and thorough enough for those cost to be considered fair and balanced. An extra condition could be another way of doing things. Just has to be doable and not too hard like, "When your opponent activates a card or effect while you have no cards in your GY: ....", or, "If you Special Summoned an [X] monster from your GY this turn, and [a/an] [X] monster(s) is sent to the GY by an opponent's card effect: .....", where X is the archetype's name.
@@yugiwinninglex "sent to the GY", or floating effects can still trigger unless they are by a card effect only. Also, there are effects that can just be in the Grave to activate and not by floating. Banishing face-down isn't the worst idea, and I wish Konami would do more with that, but even if it fixes one thing, just being banished can be another. That's why any specific wording or phrasing matters, and Konami wouldn't pay attention to that on every card they make; that's just not on their mind atm. That's why maybe a simple solution to unclog their heads is to make another part of the condition.
"Everything just leads to building like, baronne de fleur." When I saw P.U.N.K. was added to master duel I was so sad when I saw the combos was basically just P.U.N.K. summon into cryston halq and mecha phantom beast shenangines because they didnt release enough stuff for the deck to stand on its own legs(if you choose to play it that way)
Yeah, is incredible how most list they are not even playing Amazing dragon , which is a complete (pun intended) AMAIZING card, it even provides you with recurssion but everyones just want to make the same boards.
I think that is why I’m more of a fan like Vanguard or Magic even. I like Archetypes- it’s just cool to not only play a new style with a clear identity- but finding the small tweaks to make it your own personal deck story. I love playing and telling stories of the archetype both in gameplay and “head-cannon lore”
I actually really like that DPE’s attack reducing effect is only relevant in its archetypal deck but it’s weird bc it’s still not significantly different than decks running a package
So basically, a lot of players no longer build a deck around a theme they actually like. They just build a deck around summoning only monsters that have a negate effect. That's modern yugioh.
@@FailSim I'm pretty we can all agree that a player taking 5 to 10 minutes to summon so many monsters all to setup a full board of monsters each with a negate effect was not common during the Duel Monsters era or GX era, yugioh did get a bit faster shortly after the 5ds era, but still I miss summoning 1 monster, setting 1 or 2 traps and ending my turn.
@@micheleduritto I do have 1 idea to not fix at least midigate the problem would a straight up rule change. It would be each player can only use a monster effect with "negate a card's activation" once per turn as a whole. Even if the player who goes first has 4 to 5 monsters each with a negate effect only 1 can use that effect. I don't know what you guys think?
This is one of the reasons I like pure decks like Machina or infinitrack, and even combining both. I like to maintain certain boss monsters in their respective archetype
An example of a good archetypal boss monster is ultimate conductor tyranno. It has a great attack and really good effects, however it has no protection by itself, it needs the rest of the deck for that and you need to play enough dinosaur cards to actually be able to play tyranno consistently. It being a main deck boss also helps with it not being ubiquitous since it would be a potential brick if people tried to use it outside its own deck. More bosses like that and less like borreload, accesscode and Zeus please.
In my time messing with Master Duel, I definitely noticed a trend of ending on the same few monsters. It would be cool to have decks have more identity.
Agreed. This is the reason why I lowkey like Sky-striker a lot despite being kinda a meta deck, is a deck that plays sky stricker and only sky stricker monsters and their end board is literally 1 monster, 2 at most. Thunder dragons and time thief are other examples of this (even tho time thief needs a bit of support like pls)
Yeah, and I also do think that having splashable mixtures does cause the game's overall power creep to go way up way faster. Many decks played pure have a significantly lower ceiling.
Oooooooh, long af rant incoming but man I feel this. I feel this so much, its actually ruining my enjoyment of the game that every game I see someone perform a different combo to only end on the exact same endboard that Ive seen a million times. I think archetypes is something that makes yugioh really special, and generic support that allows you to bridge arcehtypes and supplement older archetypes weaknesses is something I love that I dont feel alot of other card games can replicate. But generic support should be just that, supplemental. Archetypes should take center stage with a few outliers of course, like the fossil/rock decks and cyberse link spam for people who don't want to be necessarily tethered by archetype(s) but still have a cohesive strategy multiple cards support. Because of the very nature of the game some archetypes are just weaker than others, and I think generic support that allows some archetypes to rise to their competition's heights is necessary but when something is so generic that even the meta decks can use it then theres no point to it existing I feel, nothing about that power dynamic balance shifter. With very simple changes many generic powerhouses could remain generic but still bolster some strategies more than others. For example decks like wind witches, speedroids, and dragunity could have been been made stronger than other synchro decks if Baronne required a wind type tuner. Water synchro decks couldve been strengthened if halq could only summon a water type tuner from the deck but still be strong for all synchro strategies since he could summon a synchro tuner for free basically. Power, cost, and ease of use should be balanced. good generic support that helps everyone should either have immense generic costs as its ease of use is nothing. Archetype locked or xeno/attribute locked cards should have smaller costs as the ease of use if more restricted to certain decks. Inferety barrier and solemn warning do the same thing, but one require you to play inferninty, and the other dosent, however solemns cost is higher requiring half your life points while infernity barriers cost is, nothing really. Smallworld is strictly a minus one that searches any monster in the game but costs a monster in hand and a monster in deck that are basically unusable for the rest of the duel, and that's fine, but not every deck can afford to pay solemns cost while some are completely fine with it. dark ruler no more has a generic no damage can be dealt restriction applied as cost making it unusable in otk or burn strategies. One size fits all board wipe, negation, temporary floodgates are great if there is a cost or restriction applied that could be worse than what youre using them to get rid off, but can be mitigated by good deck building to choose generic cards that they can afford to pay the cost of. if borreload savage could only be summoned in the rokket deck then it would be a cool boss monster, no changes to its effect needed, instead it everyone's boss monster, if using its negate restricted you to only being able to activate the effects of dragon type monsters until the end of the next turn It would be alot more fair I feel, and restrict a strong strategy like dragon link from using most hand traps in trade for a omni negate, Strong support for dragon decks, but not a boss monster to be passed around by anyone able to synchro out a level 8. I dislike cards that are super xeno/attribute locked, unless theyre supposed to be a archetypes pinnacle card, but some locking is needed. If you could mix archetypes under the pretense that all your generic support locked you into dark monsters, or warrior monsters then you could find a link between archetypes and play around it, and if you were to play it pure you might be able to not use as many xeno/attribute locked cards to enable you to use other types of generic support such as hand traps. It would make for much more interesting deck building. Apollousa is good generic boss design in my opinion, it costs 3-4 monsters to be effective, its a non destruction monster only negate that after 1-2 uses can easily be beaten over by a decently stated monster. Accesscode on the other hand is a 4000 beatstick that can have up to 6 spell speed 4 nontargeting destroys. If its attack was based on its archtype it would be fine, or if it could only banish code talkers it would be fine, if It (and transcode) only allowed cyberse effect monsters for its summon it would be fine but with none of that its just a boss monster for hire, any deck that can summon it uses it. Good generic boss monsters need to have at least some weakness. one of their effects restricted to their archetype if they belong to one, be xeno/attribute locked in their summoning or after useing their effect, have weak stats, have a suboptimal take on a effect (negation with no destruction for example), have no or little protection (looking at you utopic draco future) Then pinnacle boss monsters come in, the Hyperions of Agents, the Dante & Vergil for Burning abyss, the Final Sigma for mathmechs, the Darkfluid Dragon for cyberse link spam, so on and so fourth. They can have nutty effects that put generic stuff to shame but thats ok because theyre more restrictive in their summon, sometimes needing the entire deck to revolve around them for them to hit the field. Theyre allowed to have it all because Ideally they should only be stumped if they were put in a head to head encounter with another pinnacle boss monster or by a immense expenditure of resources from your opponent/ use of their targeted side deck cards. They shouldn't have to compete with and most of the time even be sidelined by whatever the flavor of the month is. I wish archetypes take the spotlight again soon, or at least decks that may mix a variety are card but at least maintain a cohesive theme and arnt just a melting pot of engines that all summon the exact same generic boss monsters suite. When dragon link, P.U.N.K. therion, and Phantom knights all end on roughly the same end board thats a biiiiiiiiig problem in my eyes. Id like to play Sprigans where my most competitve boss monster options arnt just Mirrorjade, Therion King Regulas, Zeus, and UDF. Id like the play libromancer and play more than 1 ritual monster in my ritual deck. Id like to look at a endboard and know what deck a person is playing, because if I saw a picture of DPE and barrone, or of Dragoon, or of borreload scythelock I couldnt honestly tell you what deck that person is playing. Generic support should remain as the stepping stones that aid a strategy or theme, and sometimes act as a filler boss monster for undersupported archetype or deck with no clear archetype, instead of how it is now where my archetype just influences what combo im gonna use to either summon a million negates or set up some floodgates. This is gonna sound yugiboomer as all hell, but I miss that duelist alliance time period of formats and even the format right before that, if you saw a Susanoo you knew you were playing against bujins, if it was a towers you were playing against qliphort deck, if you saw winda you were playing against shaddolls, Unicore for nekroz, dark destroyer was kozmo, If you saw a artifact you knew you were up against H.A.T., if you saw a quasar it was a synchron deck, and generic cards being relegated to supporting roles, tellerknights had access to abyss dweller and cowboy for game, but, those weren't their end goal. And theres still decks like that today I know, but, It used to be everywhere, it used to be every deck, every archetype was special, and if someone manage to successfully mix archetypes and get access to both of their most powerful cards that was considered a feat. I dont want to go back in time, i prefer a ever evolving game compared to a solved format, I just wish that archetypes would be special again, that when you saw a bunch a card with a shared name you knew they were building up to summoning something unique that requiring interesting problem solving and diverse deck building for. Nowadays since you know what a end board is going to be we just divide our cards between "going first cards", "going second cards", and "backrow hate". and that kinda blows. I like how it is now, i like the concepts of engines, something that didnt really exist back then, and the packages of cards we can squeeze into decks to further our main strategies, I just want those strategies to be a unique challenge every duel where yeah, if you failed to break their board you lose, but, nowadays 'failing to break there board' just means you couldnt play through 3 negates and a floodgate instead of outing a towers or winda. If I wanted everyone to have the same deck and have games boil down to mind games then Id go play chess.
I agree with your sentiment! It should be more like MtG - while YGO can certainly have more options, Magic has the colors that generally focus on specific strategies within each one, but you can mix and match them to make the strategies in the deck more varied, strengthen those strategies that are shared by the colors, etc., but your consistency goes down when you do so, so it's an inherent cost/reward. Perhaps in YGO then, you'd have that as well - playing a pure Archetype deck makes it easier to do the Archetype stuff, but it's relatively narrow in application. Mixing other Archetypes (and generic support) that supplement the theme could make your deck more resilient, but less consistent in pulling off any of the strats you stuffed in there.
I was trying to make a armed dragon deck on master duel. The best end board i saw was a copy paste of a tribrigade board that ends with smorg and avian. Like it's basically the same game play just more limited in design. Dont get wrong infinite negates is busted, but it doesn't feel... good
Check out Sparado's TCG Armed Dragon Link build. Small World finally dropped, so all the main pieces are here. Usually ends on Armed Dragon Thunder 10 + dragon goodstuff
@@gangadharkatragadda8418 that's who uploaded the multiple negate board lol. I just wasnt a fan. It didn't end on dragons I mean. He had the infinite negate loop. His earlier videos didnt have it but those boards weren't really good then and definitely arent now
I agree with you Paul, I love building Archetype based decks, they are lots of fun. I have to admit I do have 1 Hope Harbinger in my Blue-eyes Deck lol, but honestly it rarely gets played over something like my Blue-Eyes Alternative Ultimate Dragon or Blue-Eyes Chaos MAX Dragon. Love seeing new content here and on the other channel, love watching Team APS videos, honestly brings me plenty of positivity when I'm feeling down so thank you all. Also, just felt like mentioning here as well that I am also working on a fun Dice themed deck as a good tribute for the late-great Kazuki Takahashi. You guys have a great day.
One of the few decks that stays on theme for the most part. Also, Galaxy-Eyes, D-Link (to a lesser degree), Branded Despia, Dinomorphia (what you making besides Rexstrum and Kentregina?), RDA Resonator, Yusei.deck (aka Synchron), Code Talkers, EARTH Machines.
@@eleonarcrimson858 Rokket/Borrel is the backbone of the deck's combos, and 3 of the deck's bosses and a good number of its combo pieces are on theme for.
@@yusheitslv100 i didn't have a comment on ur general point. i just fixed the notion that dlink is an archtype. dlink is a showcase of the player base creative deck building.
Buddyfight had the right idea of limiting what type of cards you could run in your deck to remain in theme. Don't get me wrong, I like using decks build with variety, but whenever a strong generic card releases it's almost a staple. It's one thing for it to be support, and another to become the crux of your whole strategy.
This discussion reminds me of a deck profile I saw a few months ago. It was a “gravekeeper” deck profile that only ran 3 field and 3 commandant to tutor it up. The rest of the deck was just flood gates and generic good cards. Just like in the discussion I don’t view that as an actual gravekeeper deck. I would love to see creativity but not to that degree.
Awesome video. I just had this Convo with some ppl on MD. I try my best to use the boss monsters for my deck, but I always end up making Barroone, Dracco, etc.
This was my biggest issue with getting into the game. I’ve always had a love for the game, but it gets super repetitive when the best boss monsters are all generic.
I can’t even explain how strongly I agree with this. It’s so boring that every deck on master duel just goes into Halq and Auroradon combos and makes the same end board. It makes every game feel so stale and boring.
Konami has a history of straight up banning archetype boss monsters and leave generic ones untouched unless it's a floodgates. Construct, Thunder dragon colossus, towers come to mind. Cards like Herald of the arclight, abyss Dweller, Fleur, Borreload Savage dragon etc. (+many more) will never be banned.
I agree. Everyone uses the same cards - Baronne, Accesscode, Borrelsword, the ghost girl hand traps, etc. I even feel that it’s gotten to the point where people put in all the same hand traps and stuff, and then put in 2-3 cards from the actual theme and still call it “___ deck” when in reality it’s just hand trap decks with hardly any archetype cards. Like if I wanna play darklords I want to use actual darklords cards, not all the same cards everyone else uses and have like 3 darklords cards. It makes everything so uninspired now.
I fully agree with this, and it's sad that we have dozens of archetypes but they all end up utilizing 10-12 of the same monsters for the end board. Archetypes are becoming engines for the best cards in the game.
Recently have the same feeling with the new fur hire support, pretty much everyone saw that as "this doesn't benefit my borrelsword/apollousa board" and I went like, "well yeah bc it's meant to play better with the in archetype cards and boss monsters" for me even the mentality while building a deck has changed to only consider something good if it give you access to the generic extra deck monsters leaving behind everything else
this plagues every deck in the game. even what I'm running right now, Face knights, just used the kings queens Jack's and jokers to make oppalosa or constellar monsters, link into isolde, summon immortal phoenix Garfield. it's kinda sad.
@@thezestylime0989 I mean, to be fair, Face Knights were originally made to get out big monsters...the Egyptian Gods. Hell, Thunderspeed Summon is a card meant for Face Knights and Slifer
@@Xios_Angelis funnily enough one of the things you can do with thunder speed summon is search sphere mode and get rid of your opponents board on their turn.
This is why ive said for the last 6 years or so that the game has gotten extremely samey, decks don't feel like decks they just feel like engines that get your extra deck cards out. Everything is so combo centric there is no tempo or meaningful choices to make in a match.
i totally feel the same way, ive been gravitating towards decks that dont even use extra decks, or dont run handtraps and are all gas, not really sure how to solve this issue but power creep is real and konami likes money
The only decks I play that are extra deck reliant are thunder dragons and galaxy-eyes in master duel. Other than that it’s phantasm spiral or starry night that don’t require extra deck. They’re not diamond level decks but I have fun playing them and it’s satisfying when I beat cancerlich, or snoresoul
I know exactly what you mean bro I felt this watching some deck profile vids and they just go into a bunch of extra deck stuff that has nothing to do with the archetypes
@@CardGamesTV1 Generics make the opposite, since there is no deckbuilding downside to them you can put them in any deck, making decks even more similar.
Just a couple days ago on master duel I played 4 different people in a row where my opponent ended their turn with DPE and barron on their field I just turned my game off and haven't touched it since that's kinda just how the game is now creativity kinda went right out the window
The problem doesn't fall in line with the players, but Konami. Konami refuses to make GOOD series of boss monsters for each archetype so we wouldn't have to run generic options.
Your right and plus they never make cards from the anime like the ancient gear hunting hound fusion monsters and other cards that are shown in the anime but never produced
It's also an issue of set construction as well. So many sets only have a handful of playable cards in them and if they are boss monsters, they can sell more packs if the 1 broken card in a set is generic and can be played in a lot of decks. Even if there's an entire good archetype and boss monster only the people trying to play that new archetype are gona buy the set vs anyone whos deck can make a lv 8 syncro, rank 4, etc.
Very awesome point. I felt that a while ago. A good way to tone down this problem maybe when they design a boss card it should be: good effect yes, but a really busted option related to the theme of the archetype it belong. The New starving venom is a good example in my opinion and the fact that a lot of players find it trash is actually the problem
I completely agree! I've been wanting to work on a deck that have a theme. But everywhere you look, every time I look up ideas on how to go about it, they all have the same 7 or 8 extra deck cards as well as the same other main deck stuff...
I really liked your point of view. Because this happened to me recently. I started playing with an infernoble deck. And when it started it was a more pure build because I didn´t like to finish on endboards with other boss monsters. And as I digged deeper in combo videos, all the negates where endboards with random generic big monsters. So I was playing the endboard deck, not the archetype deck. And what makes you fall in love (at least for me) with an archetype is the artwork, lore or style of play. So I totally agree with your view.
I've been feeling this recently, I've gravitated more toward decks that want to play their own cards Despia has been my go to for this reason. I want to summon all the built in Albaz and Despia bosses for various reasons and their power level rewards me for it. The abusing the best extra deck monsters of X format has always been a thing but, I think the peak of the pyramid in Baron, Accesscode and Appolousa warp the game around them because they are so well rounded, have simple summoning requirements. Older monsters used to fit into being the right tool for the specific job, Stardust prevents 1 destruction effect, Silent honour ark solves 1 problem monster, Zenmaines is tough to remove etc. I think generic strong monsters should be designed like say Naturia beast, can shut down certain decks but not all and have stricter entry requirements (earth monsters or bust in NB case.) Much as I love Trishula it probably should have had the word water in one of it's materials. Or as an alternative monsters like Accesscode should have parcelled off some of it's effects to when it is made with code monsters. like the attack gain or unresponsive clause only works when summoned via code talker etc. Love the channel and videos, I don't view critique of the game as negative and appreciate it.
Yeah. I already had it when Borrelsword was the end-all-be-all of turn enders. Apoll is another prime example. I do still not own a copy of that card simply because I do not like the premise of the card. Super generic, up to 4 negates. Some better designed generic boss monsters would be cool. Having them require monsters from their archetype. Like with Savage Dragon maybe only being able to equip a dark dragon link monster. Accesscode only being able to banish Code Talker link monsters to pop things. Baronne de Fleur needing the Fleur Synchron/Necro Synchron to be able to negate things and pop things. That would give incentives to play the cards from the archetype the boss monster belongs to. I love seeing the archetypal boss monsters of Dragunity but every profile and gameplay video just makes baronne.
I felt they almost immediately after building my first combo deck in Master Duel. I'm a new player who only ever played MD. It was about five minutes of setting up an infernoble board, though that one did have an archetype boss Charles. And it was the weakest thing on the board, only there for ripping one card from hand.
There’s always going to be something that’s broken or not optimal. The last time a deck made a special ED monster we all complained. You want to be optimal and if you want to play casually then play the archetypes boss monster, no one is stopping you
@@saif19845 how many meta decks play Dingirsu? Don’t get me wrong I really like the card, I still play it in my Dragon Link deck at locals and MD but competitively it hasn’t been good for a couple years
Honestly, I kind of limit myself to archetypes where my best play IS their archetype boss monster. Evil Twins, Unchained, Sushi Ships, etc. Beyond that I sometimes splash a second engine as an option, like DPE, but i always make sure the deck im playing doesnt end up using DPE as its go to, instead as a back up plan.
As an Agents player myself, i 100% agree. Heck, the combo i use typically ends my board with masterflare, halq, and the link parshath. during the other player's turn you use the halq and get TG wonder magician to pop an artifact scythe, then use it to get baronne with an archlord kristya from parshath. no extra deck or special summons when it works. I've been getting success with a few other decks that use little to no generic support as well. blackwings, Genex , darklords, super quantums, mayakashi, etc
This is why HERO is my favorite deck and why I’ve stopped playing most of my other decks. It’s such a great feeling to summon bosses that are all in-archetype. It feels like you’re forced to splash engines and generic extra deck bosses into most other rogue decks because they don’t have enough competent support on their own to function, or it’s not as good.
I’ve had the same problem for years. I like building theme decks and not using generic bosses because its not fun. I recently made a Galaxy/Cipher deck on master duel and its been a lot of fun since I’m sticking to the theme and it takes me back to the zeal/arc-v era and its fun trying to think and play like Kite Tenjo. I dont like generic bosses being strong because like Paul said it takes too much away from decks that specialize in a specific archetype
I understand the issue is real for me. I always try to make my decks have their own identity while also trying to remain playable. The generics offer cheap power in deck building, an is why Konami makes $. So I doubt they be any desire for them to buff themed cards vs generic ones.
Thanks for making this video. I am an older YuGiOh player (50) and came back to the game last year along with a friend. The one thing I haven't really card for is everyone's end board looks the same. When looking at TH-cam videos for tips, people always seems to be aiming for the same ole thing. I feel that so many people ignore the boss monsters for that archetype. It also seems like people put so many generic cards in their deck that the actual archetype makes up only a small percentage of their decks. I definitely feel like something has been lost in this game. I feel like many of the generic cards need to be more archetype specific.
I think it's lousy future-proofing on Konami's side, you can see it even in master duel, whenever a new generic good card is added every deck uses it to the point where archetypes don't really matter In deck building, since there are all engines to pull the same 4 cards
As a returning old school player who recently got back through master duel, I can absolutely relate to this. It's a bit sad that, just like any kind of competition (including the music business) tends to create a meta / mainstream which seems to be the most profitable in the long run but kills the individuality.
Me and all of my Yu-Gi-Oh friends have all had this same discussion. We don't like how all these combos and combo guides lead to the same monster. We look at team samurai videos and it's just another copy of the same meta strategies. And it's like this for many Yu-Gi-Oh combo guides. It is not a fun way to do, it is efficient... But not as fun as when you play a more pure deck or when you're using an archetype and actually get out the archetype boss monster, it just feels more rewarding.
check my channel out with deck profiles i im real creative with my decks i own the cards as well always do unique stuff never have same end boards they are meta and different
As you say this look at trif channel.... team sam show casing a blue-eyes deck that won which isn't even a pure blue-eyes deck at all and it has no fusions what so ever..
the point here is highlighted here very clearly.Negation addiction is the problem how did this come about by genericness and the way to easily sell cards. The main issue is deck guides in Yu-Gi-Oh are all competitive no one just has a deck guide for fun or casual times. konaminis trying to mitigate somewhat with board breakers. whether it can be solved I really don't now
I pointed out this issue years ago but it’s becoming more prevalent than ever now. This was the same problem with the end of the GOAT era, synchro era, and other periods in the game. Every deck was required to play so much generic “good stuff” in order to compete to the point that every deck looked basically the same minus the 10 or so cards you used to enable those broken cards to get the deck up to an even 40 and give it some semblance of a “theme” so it wasn’t just DM Staples: The Deck. It feels like the best modern decks are the ones that can play the smallest amount of in-archetype cards in order to leave room for the “good stuff”. That’s why things like Prank-Kids, Tenyi, etc. were popular. It was like 12 cards you could put into a deck with 18+ handtraps and however many draw/starter spells you can fit. Master Duel has really opened my eyes to how generic the game has become. Whenever I’m looking into making a new deck I find out I already have 75% or more of the extra deck and main deck crafted, I just need the archetypal stuff and maybe some slightly less generic staples (Allure of Darkness comes to mind, or maybe your chosen archetype gains advantage off of playing Droplet rather than Imperm, etc) that enable it. You could definitely make counter arguments to some of this, and I know there are exceptions to every rule, but I guarantee you didn’t buy all of those Adventure cards to play the pure version of the deck.
Also shoutout to Swordsoul for having 3 incredible in-archetype boss monsters worth building a deck around, even if they do lean on Baronne and Yang Zings to get there. They haven’t been relevant in awhile but Cyber Dragons were always good about that too.
Yup, if you don’t want to get aggressively bum rushed, you have to run hand traps. I’m working on a coin flip control deck right now. I’ve given up on trying to get to Diamond 1 after DPE came out.
I can't speak for YGO Master Duel, but in the TCG not every deck needs handtraps in our current format. If your deck has enough gas going first, with tons of going-second cards like Raigeki, Harpie's Feather Duster, or Evenly Matched in the Side Deck, or if it's just straight-up a going-second deck, you don't need as many handtraps. In fact, many of the decks that won the most recent YCS weren't running handtraps, such as Drytron (Unless you count Herald of Orange Light, a card that isn't generic).
The only "hand trap" I run are infinite imper. And evenly matched which technically are and are not because they don't have to be activated from the hand. Decks now are built to play through handtraps so they aren't as much of a threat than in the past.
Well, when i was testing agents combos i was focusing in the coppying efect of the level 10 sincro, searthing the sky sanctuary trap or doing a venus combo to make herald sincro with ties that binds to searth valkyrie and the statue. I really like using these "tribal" sinergis
This is why I play Dinosaurs. Ultimate Conductor Tyranno is one of the few Main Deck boss monsters left. Scrap-Dino can also make Dolkka and Laggia which are like XYZ Dino boss monsters. But UCT can still disrupt boards which is awesome.
I agree with you Paul! When I build the deck I try to use as much cards from the Archetype as possible including to trap and spells where fit. As new as it is its already old to see DPE in every decks end board. I want to make Armytile the Chaos Phantasm in Sacred Beasts and similar graphics to other decks, they should make boss monsters more worth while the more from the Archetype they have in with it.
I definitely got a similar feeling. Especially if those end boards are cards some can't afford. That why I like about some decks like D/D/D. They are good as an engine on its own. But don't get me wrong. It's also cool to have some generic stuff too. It really brings creativity to the card game. A deck I think of is like the base deck a format back. Sure it was a bit too crazy but the fact people were able to create such a synergy was pretty cool. I get both sides in a way.
Great video Paul. It sounds like what the game needs is some balancing, I've only started getting back into the game recently and watching videos to teach me the stuff I've missed, but what I've found is that everyone seems to play the same deck, there are over 10K cards and people only pick from the same couple of hundred cards
Deck building kind of lost its charm when pile decks started becoming more of a thing, imo. Like everyone runs the same engine it seems like, there's not much variety anymore. That's why I like duel links so much lately. There's so many decks running around there and it feels like everyone has a chance, to an extent. I dunno, I'm just rambling
Isn't pile decks more or less the best in deck building? Imo they express creativity and skill vs following an archetype. But I can see your point of the same engines being used
I get where you're coming from, I get pile deck's aren't everyone's cup of tea, for me personally though I think pile decks are super cool, like being able to look at all the different little interactions between the engines and all that is super fun for me Not saying you're view is wrong, just expressing my thoughts on it
@@Omegaman4321 No when you put it like that, I get what you mean. It's like the reply above, it does take skill to see what all clicks with what. But in the end, they're probably running a modified version of the same engine everyone else is, or as Paul stated, trying to make the same generic Boss monster
To be fair, the moment they added handtraps is the moment every deck became the same. No deck goes without 3 ash 3 maxx c 3 imperm. Maybe less of them, but even strict archetypes like hero, despia, and floo will all run these handtraps. Every opening strategy is the same where you just pray you hvae atleast 2 handtraps. You either make a baroness or appolussa, then you maybe make your archetype boss monster. There is no way for yugioh to fix this unless they actually commit to resetting the power level of the game. They almost did it with links, but they fumbled really hard when all they did was make link generic board spam that was even more broken than release synchro.
I agree with you, 100%. I'm kind of a newcomer to the game, about 2 years of playing. I started because my son watched the anime, then we bought some starter decks for fun. Shortly after, I found out one of my best friends loved the game when we were kids, back when the show was first aired in America. He has played off and on with some friends and cousins since. My buddies dark magician Deck was killing my structure decks, so I started getting singles from TCG player and watching all sorts of you tube videos on deck profiles and tips (which lead me to APS channels - great stuff by the way). I now have built 8 decks, and I see this being an identity issue, like you expressed. The originality is killed and the thought of winning a duel will come down to if you are using these newly released 'meta' cards that seem out of place for your theme. Everyone will play the same cards, or have a pathetic duel to the point you can feel bad about how you just board locked and destroyed your opponent or friend. I'd rather have this game be 'competitive' and not force your design of a strong deck.
3:30 I felt this. Zoodiacs are by far my favourite deck, but having to go into Zeus, utopic Draco future, or megaclops pretty much every time gets boring quick, and takes away from the special feeling of using a specific archetype. Though of course that is just my opinion.
Absolutely. Recently build a blue eyes deck and all the combo videos i was looking up just go straight to baronne. Thankfully i found a youtuber named jonikku who plays pure blue eyes on masterduel. Im thankful that I was able to at least learn some combos from him and what end boards I can make. Not trying to promote him but I feel the only way you can actually learn is by finding someone who 1 tricks a deck and makes content solely with that type of architype
Yu-Gi-Oh has always had generic cards that would be jammed into every deck, even before Synchros came out. Generic staples are all over the game's history, and making a list of them would be long and strenuous. That said, I do like the idea of generic boss monsters being weaker than archetypal ones. Archetypal boss monsters can usually only be made by their own archetype, or have effects that only benefit their archetype, so it makes sense that, given their restrictions, they should be more powerful than generic boss monsters.
Having generic staples that aren't boss monsters was not what it is today. You still had boss monsters per archetype you needed that archetype to run. Now most decks aren't even viable without a generic boss monster thrown in. What makes it worse is it's usually a boss monster from a archetype that needed the support to be viable but that support is made super generic an splashable. You haven't noticed the most ban heavy/requested cards are all generic boss monsters these days? Back in the day archetype cards were priority.
@@crowing3886 Black Luster Soldier - Envoy of the Beginning, Summoned Skull, Jinzo, Chaos Emperor Dragon (Pre-errata), Stardust Dragon, Black Rose Dragon, Trishula, Brionac, Dark Rebellion Xyz Dragon, Silent Honor Ark, Castel, Lightning Chidori, Firewall Dragon (Pre-errata), I could go on. The game has always had generic boss monsters.
@@diamondsanchez224 the generic cards existed, but Lightsworns and Gladiator Beasts were examples of powerful archetypes that didn't need to rely on generic boss monsters. A synchro deck might have a Stardust or Black Rose in the extra deck to help in a pinch, but the end goal was usually within-archetype.
@@joshuab3918 But just like how you had archetypes like those that were outliers, you still have archetypes like that today. Floowandereeze, Sky Strikers, Dinomorphia, Live-Twins, and Branded Despia all end on their in-archetype cards.
@@diamondsanchez224 Well, they weren't all the same first turn board with dedication of being decks main boss. First turn boards were different and those generic monsters were auxiliary tools, not the main bosses or win condition of the decks. Nowadays generic monsters are the boss monsters of many decks and they ALL generally end up being on the very first turn or at worst 2nd turn.
I actually had this problem while playing d/d/d, with it being able to go into zeus and baronne. Ultimately i decide to keep them out, and i had so much more fun being able to pivot into kuga and purple armageddon in situation where a negate and board clear were options
Remember when dragoon was running rampant and every single lower tier deck just threw it in? it's the same philosophy imo. splashable engines etc. (adventure) homogenization sucks to see especially with a game with zero rotation.
I actually ran into this the other day. I play D/D/Ds and have been loving it. For a while I had Super Doom King Bright Armageddon (level 10 synchro) in the extra. I recently got a Baronne, so I made the switch even though it's harder to make due to D/D/D locks from some of the pieces.
Here is my takeaway from this video: the real problem is that the extra deck as a mechanic is itself too powerful, not too generic. If we look back at formats like Edison and the early XYZ era, the power level of individual extra deck cards was pretty low. The ED for Edison is pretty much a copy-paste job for every single deck, but the difference is that your maindeck is really where the gameplay is happening. ED boss monsters didn’t really exist in the sense that you were tying to end on something and make it stick. Stardust was strong but never a game ender, and never something that every deck wanted to end on T1. It was an OPTION. The extra deck should be a tool box, NOT the lubricant for all of your plays. So I propose (on top of weakening the power of generic extra deck monsters) we have more decks that end on MAINDECK boss monsters. God Phoenix Gierfried is a really cool example. The problem with this idea is that you have to actually design a combo deck to work without the ED, otherwise you’re just going to end up with decks like Flunder and Draco. But I think those decks are just as necessary for the game as wombo-combo.
look at the new Rescue monsters just announced for the OCG, main boss is a main deck card that looks like it will be easily sumonable, and basically just let's you set 4 back row from your deck. I think itll be extremely fun, but the meta plague will then just link it off for oppalosa or something...
@@Predaplanter why do you think that? Because it doesn't rely on net decking your ED? Because Empen was specifically designed to counter ED's that just end on a bunch of atk position omni negates? Because it can utilize D Shifter to prevent most of the meta from using their graveyard as a second hand?
I've had this problem for years. I was saying yesterday that when it comes to improving how you play with a new deck or archetype, whether it's improving the deck or learning better uses of the cards you have, most "advice" offered is: "Pfft! You're using THAT archetype! Lame. Use this one instead. It won worlds." Or, you TECHNICALLY can use the deck, but only as an engine to bring out something else. And I like the idea of each deck having a worthwhile identity.
This is because handtraps have killed the ability to play things that aren't negates. If you don't build your negates up, you just lose to generic handtraps. So you have to use the generic boss monsters to survive.
I've been trying to get back into YGO because I love your videos and I've been feeling this so hard! Even if I'm playing a "non meta" deck all the deck lists online use these generic boss monsters. It makes it boring, and a little harder to learn how to use the actual archetypal combos. Totally with you on this
I agree with this fully and tbh I'm starting to hate master duel I feel like I run into the same decks or monsters every duel I have more fun on duel links
It is funny that you used that example on Blue-eyes as I have a video recently that did that very same thing you mentioned. I ended on Sheou, Hot red dragon and something else. It was cool, but it wasn't really a "blue-eyes" board. I do agree that there should be more locks to what you can summon for decks but I hope they would create boss monsters worth summoning for that lock. It would be creative to see the end boards but they need to be worth only playing that type.
Lots of people probably got into Yugioh cause of the anime and the cool artworks, so it sucks that not all decks that people love can be played competitively
I agree. I like to make team-up decks with two different archetypes, in which case it's really helpful when their respective boss monsters are generic. But using the boss monsters of the archetypes I'm playing is always the main point of the decks I build. And I'm really not a fan of the fact that these boss monsters can be played in pretty much every deck.
7 out of 10 people I matched with always end up with the monsters you mentioned, I've been playing the agents even before master flare Hyperion and the other support came out, and I miss the back and forth of old Yu-Gi-Oh unlike today where everything feels hopeless if you don't draw the right cards
I feel you 100% just got back into yugioh thanks to master duel. I’m collecting but also love playing w nice looking cards so I started thinking about building a deck until I realized that the game has lost a lot of the themed aspect. You don’t have to think too much to play those kinds of cards and I guess it’s to make a “kids “ game more approachable but I don’t feel confident in any deck I build without the “modern staples” you described. It’s nice to not know what’s coming and to have a few turns to see if you can play around it instead of the game just ending because of the obvious choices of successful boards to make.
I love water decks and pretty much every one has the toadally awesome package. It’s really like we choose a boss monster(s) and then an engine or archetype to support it because it’s the only way to stay somewhat competitive.
I know what you mean. I built and am currently playing a The Agent deck myself, and all the Extra Deck recommendations I find are like Baronne De Fleur, Borreload Savage, Apollousa and other generic boss monsters. Since I can't find them around here and I also can't spend the money they are worth, I decided to put a bit of a twist on mine, even if it's less powerful. They're still generic monsters since this archetype doesn't have much besides Protector of the Agents Moon, Masterflare Hyperion and The Executor of the Underworld Pluto, but I decided to add Brionac, Trishula, Herald of Pure Light, BLS Soldier of Chaos (not budget but already had it so...). There are some "generic" monsters that work really well like Herald of Mirages. But the problem is as you mention, there's too little archetypes with strong boss monsters that are only useful for that speciffic archetype, which is a real shame because in the end, they end up being "weak" or only used as means to get the generic board in the end. And so, the game ends up being about who builds the big boss board faster.
I totally see where you're coming from. I look at tons of deck blueprints and they all see like the same deck. Almost all decks running stuff like Ash Blossom. But seeing as it's a tough card for me to get, I just take the builds with a grain of salt and make my own. I also like keeping to archetypes unless I really need to mix in something that'll help the deck along. In my case, I've been working on a 98% pure HERO deck, but with a King of The Swamp mixed in.
I love these rants , don't know why people wouldn't! You touch on everything that is unlikeable or negative in the game and aren't coming from a place of that nature. It makes the videos a great watch and great for explaining to new players how the game overall is played and what is currently upsetting the fragile meta this game has.
Basically ghost reaper is more valuable than anyone understands if most people have a copy paste end board, copy paste those boards and reaper those problems.
I agree completely, that is exactly why I go for decks like heroes and dogmatika/shaddoll/invoked. Your boss monsters are of the archetype. I just always felt not satisfied summoning generics from the extra deck.
I agree with you. For example, I feel like Borreload Savage Dragon should have some kind of effect like "If you don't control a Borrel card, you must tribute this card at the end of your turn" or "You must equip a Borrel Link card in order to put Borrel Counter to this card."
I remember this being one of those things that I thought was so weird when I started. Like “the deck belongs to x archetype right? What are all these random extra deck monsters doing here?” It’s one of those things that I basically got used to without realizing it, and honestly paul is the first person I’ve seen on yt to clearly voice this opinion on it
I’m a pretty competitive player my self, and I have to say I kinda agree with you. The thing is that would require more archetype locking. If u think about it baronne, savage, hot red, accescode, are all technically a boss monster of their respective archetype. In ur case u mentioned the new Agent boss monster which btw is also generic so if it was worth using over baronne it would be used everywhere over baronne unless it had an in archetype exclusive use which made it worth it. In this specific case I find the combo capabilities that the new Hyperion synchro offer worth summoning over baronne if u are playing the shine ball combo. Over all I agree with u I wish there was more diversitiy in deck building and end boards. Great video!
Main decks have just become extenders for the extra deck, you go always the extra mile in an archetypal deck or a themed deck..just to go back the same boss monsters in the extra deck. It is a repeated cycle. You really don’t have to invest time in a deck anymore imo because you just throw in the same extenders for a long play to just set your board up, that’s why I love watching you guys do casual duels…no generic extra boss, no repeated extenders, no hand traps.
Dragunity may actually be one of the few archetypes where you can stick to the cards (Bosses included) and compete. I was using them for the last few months until I switched to Fur Hire x Danger! And honestly only switched because of curiosity lol
Man I completely agree. I have been back and forth with Yu-Gi-Oh for a while, but when I got back into it I bought a lot of King's Court packs because I am just a big fan of the Court Cards in general (I love regular playing cards I always carry at least one pack on me) and the boss monsters where kinda cool too. So I got the cards went on to TH-cam to look at deck profile and not one of them had any of the boss monsters in the Extra deck it was just a way to summon Utopic Draco Future or Utopia Double or Nothing OTK. Utopic Draco Future and Utopia came with King's Court so it was expected for people to use them but damn I just wish these decks would also use the Court boss monsters since they have some pretty decent effects. One thing I think would be better is if boss monsters for specific archetypes their effects should just get better if you used they archetypes for the summon or how many you have on the field/in the graveyard. I know some archetypes do this but not all of them do and it's a damn shame that they don't
I strongly agree with this video and your opinion. I'm a big fan of yugioh, and without a lot of people to play with, I tend to be drawn to Master Duel. The problem is that I don't find it fun using generic boss monsters or meta decks, I try to do the best I can with the decks I like. However, with Verte Anaconda, everyone has easy access to DPE as well as other generic boss monsters. Now whenever I play, if I am going second and don't have any negates, my opponents nearly always get a near unbreakable board with hand traps and multiple negates. This is basically making Master Duel unplayable once you reach platinum if you aren't running these generic boss monsters or meta decks.
I generally agree with you. I find it quite annoying going up against decks as well that have been playing a certain set of cards, then suddenly DPE or Access are on the field, just kind of feels like I have been cheated.
Feel you with that one, the only deck I play that makes it's own boss monster is ABC but that's ignoring the fact that I throw in Apollousa/Accesscode/IP etc because ABCs gimmick let's you plus off link climbing then fusing from GY. Is it powerful and fun? Yeah, but I could just Splight and end on a similar board with better disruption since Toadally Awesome is fair
I think it depends on the archetype. For example, Infernity, one of my favourite decks, is all about making these crazy boards with lots of disruption whilst clearing out your hand to set up your breaks and barriers. The end board with some of the current versions involves Baronne, Borreload Savage, and Apollousa and I think this fits quite well in achieving what the deck does and has been known to do in all the variations it's had throughout the years. That being said, it would also be cool to feel like I could switch any one of those out for an Infernity Doom Dragon and feel like I'm not actively reducing my chances of winning the game.
Playing competitive is one thing but there is a reason people just surrender in causal duels once someone starts a negate board If you didn’t want me to okay at all, shouldve just said so. Save you the trouble and not play someone like you to begin with
This is why I love D/D/D they are all cool looking monsters that like to work primarily with each other. You can use baron if you get the hand but you don’t even have an end board that’s not some good ddd monster. Siegfried, Gilgamesh High Wave King Casear, and now in master duel Deus X. And pretty all have some effects
I feel this, i recently got back into yugioh and was searching for a fun deck to play, really like libromancers so went to see some profiles.... of the 40 cards only like 9 were libromancers and they were just used as fodder to make halq, heatsoul, accesscode, masquerena, appolousa... you don't even use any of the libro monsters at all, made me really sad. Ended up getting weather painters, that recently got a cool boss monster pair and a nice way of putting them on board
This might be controversial (no clue if it is), but I think generic boss monsters should ALWAYS be outclassed by archetypal boss monsters. makes things less samey by stengthening archetype influence & gives you a reason to play a deck.
agreed
Players are the problem. Not the cards 😒
A simple way to do this would be to make generic bosses without a quick effect, only a trigger effect.
The problem with that is that then it makes one archetype better than another which is not what anyone wants.
The best thing to do is to split the generic cards into multiple cards some of which could be archetype based but others which would be attribute and type etc.
There shouldn't be any 100% generic cards but they also shouldn't be completely locked down unless their effect would be so powerful you need to balance it by attaching it to a relatively weak deck.
Synchro Zoroa for the Magistus is a perfect example of this. Magistus can easily spam the board full in a turn (especially if you combine it with even something like Dark Magician like I do).
The thing is this deck doesn't have a bunch of negates or protection by default in-archetype. It has two once per turn destruction protections and one of those has to be in the graveyard.
Giving it the ability to floodgate ED monsters would be overly powerful but the rest of the deck and locking its effects to requiring Magistus monsters balances it.
BODE is a perfect example of a set where someone knows what they're doing but clearly not everyone.
Zoroa can even reborn itself like DPE but you need to destroy another Magistus monster to do so. Imagine how much use DPE would see if you needed to destroy or even remove from play a Destiny Hero to reborn him like Zoroa.
The problem is that Konami, like most people and people run things, only understands short-term money making.
Releasing one generic card for everything gets you hype and short-term big money, while if you release 160 different versions of the same card for different archetypes and types and whatever and you'd make much more money in the long run.
It would also make the game a little more interesting because they don't have to be the exact same effects.
You can have a machine Zeus and a spellcaster Zeus in that the card can ultimately send everything to the graveyard but the specifics could and probably should be different for variety and lore.
@@CardGamesTV1 I don't agree on that one. More often than not, players will just run the best cards available to them
I feel these generic extra deck monsters that are actually part of an archetype should have a very poweful effect reliant on the archetype. For example, accesscode talker has 2 very poweful effects. If it had to use a codetalker monster for either (not both) the attack boost or the pop, it would at least feel more attached to the archetype while still being generic.
I love this idea
I like this idea. Number 90 is good example of this type of thing. It is a generic rank 8 with a monster negate, but you only get the full benefits by playing it in galaxy-eyes.
We should go back to the era where fusion monsters need specific fusion summon to get them to the field. Link monsters destroyed the fun interactions we once had with yugioh.
Yeah very much, I feel like each one a these should essentially be a reversed black rose dragon
Low key what borrelend is, good generic card but negate effect forces you to play (or at least have one in your GY) Rokket
This is a take I agree on so much. It's so boring to end on generic boards and cards like Baronne, Borreload Savage and Accesscode, while probably good for the game, are the one thing I dislike the most.
Generic stuff should just help a deck to get to their end board, not *be* the end board
Exactly, this should be always the final result, a little help, not the final board. This tends to make the game even more broken in every way, because, then, everyone tends to be running Kaijus, just a Lava Golem, a Gameciel and a Lightning Storm in hand solves the board
"This is a blue eyes deck? Where are the blue eyes cards? "
"In the graveyard."
Agreed 100%
This is why I should read a few comments before commenting myself. Pretty much said this exact thing 😅
I agree. I love salamangreat but it bums me out that pretty much my only win condition is accescode(before it was borrelsword). If I don't have him in my deck then I'm at a huge disadvantage, I wish salamangreat had better archetype specific boss monsters.
One of my all time favorite Team APS jokes. “Where are the blue eyes monsters? In the graveyard!”
blue eyes monsters are low key zombies lol
I was thinking of this joke at the start of the video xD
what vid was that?
@@alphamarigi don't remember exactly but a video where thez teach new player
That video made me sub tbh, also the ftk police video is hilarious
Absolutely agree with you in how a lot of these generic boss monsters makes decks lose their identity. I play more in master duel and in ranked, you always see Barrone, Pred into DPE, Acesscode Talker, etc. and it gets very stale and boring after having to face it so many duels in a row. I find duels much more fun when I’m going against a a deck that sticks to a specific archetype, especially if it’s something I haven’t seen before.
i mean yeah i have some of these staples in there in case i go against annoying decks with big things to swing over…but i usually don’t use them unless it serves the purpose of removing their annoyances. I just wish i didnt HAVE to have them there.
my favorite thing is always seeing a generic card and trying to play it's own archetype (already done so with predaplants, code talkers, kaijus, crystron, crusadia, true king/draco, and am currently making a pure drytron deck) it's a neat way to learn about more archetypes and how the cards were INTENDED to be used. Also its just more fun playing cards that way
Accesscode Talker is a necessary evil to make a lot of rogue/casual decks semi-viable. I swear Altergeist is unplayable for me without it because their boss monster, Memorygant, is pretty bad even if it's a little easy to summon. But what's the point of summoning it? It's just a beatstick with a barely decent protection that only protects it from destruction effects. It's a worse version of Accesscode Talker that can pop any card without even having to enter BP (unlike Memorygant that's also limited to monster cards). And the worst thing is that Memorygant does not even interact with its own archetype...
if you like going up against archetype specific boss monsters then I have just the one for you. Ojamas! I know they are a total meme from the show but in reality they are a total PAIN in the backside to play against. A really good Ojama player going first can drop Ojama King and Ojama Knight on the field and good luck getting over that! Ojama Knight ( with Ojama Country field spell on the board of course) is so f*%ked up and annoying that it can make players rage quit. it is by far my fave pure archetype deck to play with lol
I agree. I haven’t played TCG in years, but through Master Duel, I’ve realized that it’s just different ways to get to the same 3 boards. Synchro negates, xyz negates or link negates. Like, why?
Generic boss monsters need substantial downsides to use their effects (i.e. discarding or tributing as cost, no Battle Phase this/next turn, etc.) That way you have to be smart about how you ration your disruptions outside of hard once-per-turns while offering incentive to use in-archetype bosses.
I like it, I think it would help broaden the meta. Not that I know lol
Problem is discard sometimes is a plus. Bt agreed. Generic boss monster need to have a cost or maybe make one of the effect like no usable unless use archetype cards as materials.
Eg. Accesscode - cannot pop unless using code talker as material. Or sthing along that lines
Yeah I agree discard/send to the GY is out of the table. Banishing as cost can be a problem as well. You have to be specific and thorough enough for those cost to be considered fair and balanced. An extra condition could be another way of doing things. Just has to be doable and not too hard like, "When your opponent activates a card or effect while you have no cards in your GY: ....", or, "If you Special Summoned an [X] monster from your GY this turn, and [a/an] [X] monster(s) is sent to the GY by an opponent's card effect: .....", where X is the archetype's name.
@@jvsonic2468 maybe the cost will be like send (like droplet so it doesn't trigger anything) or banish face down I guess.
@@yugiwinninglex "sent to the GY", or floating effects can still trigger unless they are by a card effect only. Also, there are effects that can just be in the Grave to activate and not by floating. Banishing face-down isn't the worst idea, and I wish Konami would do more with that, but even if it fixes one thing, just being banished can be another. That's why any specific wording or phrasing matters, and Konami wouldn't pay attention to that on every card they make; that's just not on their mind atm. That's why maybe a simple solution to unclog their heads is to make another part of the condition.
"Everything just leads to building like, baronne de fleur."
When I saw P.U.N.K. was added to master duel I was so sad when I saw the combos was basically just P.U.N.K. summon into cryston halq and mecha phantom beast shenangines because they didnt release enough stuff for the deck to stand on its own legs(if you choose to play it that way)
Yeah, is incredible how most list they are not even playing Amazing dragon , which is a complete (pun intended) AMAIZING card, it even provides you with recurssion but everyones just want to make the same boards.
@@andresospi8005 some arent even playing it? Thats just....sad.
Ah yes turn skip turbo
Pretty sad too considering Amazing Dragon lets you spend Baronne's negate and then remake her every turn.
@@Arbal3st spraking of her she was fun to MAYBE get out in gusto so I can negate into sphreez so I can have her on the board like "what up *itch?"
I think that is why I’m more of a fan like Vanguard or Magic even. I like Archetypes- it’s just cool to not only play a new style with a clear identity- but finding the small tweaks to make it your own personal deck story.
I love playing and telling stories of the archetype both in gameplay and “head-cannon lore”
I heard this quote from TGS Anime, that I completely agree with "Why would I play Borrels if every deck can make my boss monster?"
As a Destiny HERO player, I feel that on a spiritual level...
I actually really like that DPE’s attack reducing effect is only relevant in its archetypal deck but it’s weird bc it’s still not significantly different than decks running a package
@@SquibbyJ is meant to be the opposite of shining phoenix enforcers effect
So basically, a lot of players no longer build a deck around a theme they actually like. They just build a deck around summoning only monsters that have a negate effect. That's modern yugioh.
Despia, floowandereeze, and sky strikers have very little negates but dominate.
Why do people have this misconception this is a modern thing. It's ALWAYS been a thing. It's not modern.
@@FailSim negates are a modern thing.....did Summoned Skull have negates? Chaos Emperor? (but for sure they were still generic boss monsters)
@@FailSim I'm pretty we can all agree that a player taking 5 to 10 minutes to summon so many monsters all to setup a full board of monsters each with a negate effect was not common during the Duel Monsters era or GX era, yugioh did get a bit faster shortly after the 5ds era, but still I miss summoning 1 monster, setting 1 or 2 traps and ending my turn.
@@micheleduritto I do have 1 idea to not fix at least midigate the problem would a straight up rule change. It would be each player can only use a monster effect with "negate a card's activation" once per turn as a whole. Even if the player who goes first has 4 to 5 monsters each with a negate effect only 1 can use that effect. I don't know what you guys think?
This is one of the reasons I like pure decks like Machina or infinitrack, and even combining both. I like to maintain certain boss monsters in their respective archetype
I'm the same with Heroes and Utopia
@@muhammedbadjie1960 freaking Love Utopia!
An example of a good archetypal boss monster is ultimate conductor tyranno. It has a great attack and really good effects, however it has no protection by itself, it needs the rest of the deck for that and you need to play enough dinosaur cards to actually be able to play tyranno consistently. It being a main deck boss also helps with it not being ubiquitous since it would be a potential brick if people tried to use it outside its own deck. More bosses like that and less like borreload, accesscode and Zeus please.
In my time messing with Master Duel, I definitely noticed a trend of ending on the same few monsters. It would be cool to have decks have more identity.
Agreed. This is the reason why I lowkey like Sky-striker a lot despite being kinda a meta deck, is a deck that plays sky stricker and only sky stricker monsters and their end board is literally 1 monster, 2 at most. Thunder dragons and time thief are other examples of this (even tho time thief needs a bit of support like pls)
Yeah, and I also do think that having splashable mixtures does cause the game's overall power creep to go way up way faster. Many decks played pure have a significantly lower ceiling.
Oooooooh, long af rant incoming but man I feel this.
I feel this so much, its actually ruining my enjoyment of the game that every game I see someone perform a different combo to only end on the exact same endboard that Ive seen a million times. I think archetypes is something that makes yugioh really special, and generic support that allows you to bridge arcehtypes and supplement older archetypes weaknesses is something I love that I dont feel alot of other card games can replicate.
But generic support should be just that, supplemental. Archetypes should take center stage with a few outliers of course, like the fossil/rock decks and cyberse link spam for people who don't want to be necessarily tethered by archetype(s) but still have a cohesive strategy multiple cards support.
Because of the very nature of the game some archetypes are just weaker than others, and I think generic support that allows some archetypes to rise to their competition's heights is necessary but when something is so generic that even the meta decks can use it then theres no point to it existing I feel, nothing about that power dynamic balance shifter.
With very simple changes many generic powerhouses could remain generic but still bolster some strategies more than others. For example decks like wind witches, speedroids, and dragunity could have been been made stronger than other synchro decks if Baronne required a wind type tuner. Water synchro decks couldve been strengthened if halq could only summon a water type tuner from the deck but still be strong for all synchro strategies since he could summon a synchro tuner for free basically.
Power, cost, and ease of use should be balanced. good generic support that helps everyone should either have immense generic costs as its ease of use is nothing. Archetype locked or xeno/attribute locked cards should have smaller costs as the ease of use if more restricted to certain decks. Inferety barrier and solemn warning do the same thing, but one require you to play inferninty, and the other dosent, however solemns cost is higher requiring half your life points while infernity barriers cost is, nothing really. Smallworld is strictly a minus one that searches any monster in the game but costs a monster in hand and a monster in deck that are basically unusable for the rest of the duel, and that's fine, but not every deck can afford to pay solemns cost while some are completely fine with it. dark ruler no more has a generic no damage can be dealt restriction applied as cost making it unusable in otk or burn strategies. One size fits all board wipe, negation, temporary floodgates are great if there is a cost or restriction applied that could be worse than what youre using them to get rid off, but can be mitigated by good deck building to choose generic cards that they can afford to pay the cost of.
if borreload savage could only be summoned in the rokket deck then it would be a cool boss monster, no changes to its effect needed, instead it everyone's boss monster, if using its negate restricted you to only being able to activate the effects of dragon type monsters until the end of the next turn It would be alot more fair I feel, and restrict a strong strategy like dragon link from using most hand traps in trade for a omni negate, Strong support for dragon decks, but not a boss monster to be passed around by anyone able to synchro out a level 8. I dislike cards that are super xeno/attribute locked, unless theyre supposed to be a archetypes pinnacle card, but some locking is needed. If you could mix archetypes under the pretense that all your generic support locked you into dark monsters, or warrior monsters then you could find a link between archetypes and play around it, and if you were to play it pure you might be able to not use as many xeno/attribute locked cards to enable you to use other types of generic support such as hand traps. It would make for much more interesting deck building.
Apollousa is good generic boss design in my opinion, it costs 3-4 monsters to be effective, its a non destruction monster only negate that after 1-2 uses can easily be beaten over by a decently stated monster. Accesscode on the other hand is a 4000 beatstick that can have up to 6 spell speed 4 nontargeting destroys. If its attack was based on its archtype it would be fine, or if it could only banish code talkers it would be fine, if It (and transcode) only allowed cyberse effect monsters for its summon it would be fine but with none of that its just a boss monster for hire, any deck that can summon it uses it.
Good generic boss monsters need to have at least some weakness. one of their effects restricted to their archetype if they belong to one, be xeno/attribute locked in their summoning or after useing their effect, have weak stats, have a suboptimal take on a effect (negation with no destruction for example), have no or little protection (looking at you utopic draco future)
Then pinnacle boss monsters come in, the Hyperions of Agents, the Dante & Vergil for Burning abyss, the Final Sigma for mathmechs, the Darkfluid Dragon for cyberse link spam, so on and so fourth. They can have nutty effects that put generic stuff to shame but thats ok because theyre more restrictive in their summon, sometimes needing the entire deck to revolve around them for them to hit the field. Theyre allowed to have it all because Ideally they should only be stumped if they were put in a head to head encounter with another pinnacle boss monster or by a immense expenditure of resources from your opponent/ use of their targeted side deck cards. They shouldn't have to compete with and most of the time even be sidelined by whatever the flavor of the month is.
I wish archetypes take the spotlight again soon, or at least decks that may mix a variety are card but at least maintain a cohesive theme and arnt just a melting pot of engines that all summon the exact same generic boss monsters suite. When dragon link, P.U.N.K. therion, and Phantom knights all end on roughly the same end board thats a biiiiiiiiig problem in my eyes. Id like to play Sprigans where my most competitve boss monster options arnt just Mirrorjade, Therion King Regulas, Zeus, and UDF. Id like the play libromancer and play more than 1 ritual monster in my ritual deck. Id like to look at a endboard and know what deck a person is playing, because if I saw a picture of DPE and barrone, or of Dragoon, or of borreload scythelock I couldnt honestly tell you what deck that person is playing. Generic support should remain as the stepping stones that aid a strategy or theme, and sometimes act as a filler boss monster for undersupported archetype or deck with no clear archetype, instead of how it is now where my archetype just influences what combo im gonna use to either summon a million negates or set up some floodgates.
This is gonna sound yugiboomer as all hell, but I miss that duelist alliance time period of formats and even the format right before that, if you saw a Susanoo you knew you were playing against bujins, if it was a towers you were playing against qliphort deck, if you saw winda you were playing against shaddolls, Unicore for nekroz, dark destroyer was kozmo, If you saw a artifact you knew you were up against H.A.T., if you saw a quasar it was a synchron deck, and generic cards being relegated to supporting roles, tellerknights had access to abyss dweller and cowboy for game, but, those weren't their end goal. And theres still decks like that today I know, but, It used to be everywhere, it used to be every deck, every archetype was special, and if someone manage to successfully mix archetypes and get access to both of their most powerful cards that was considered a feat. I dont want to go back in time, i prefer a ever evolving game compared to a solved format, I just wish that archetypes would be special again, that when you saw a bunch a card with a shared name you knew they were building up to summoning something unique that requiring interesting problem solving and diverse deck building for. Nowadays since you know what a end board is going to be we just divide our cards between "going first cards", "going second cards", and "backrow hate". and that kinda blows. I like how it is now, i like the concepts of engines, something that didnt really exist back then, and the packages of cards we can squeeze into decks to further our main strategies, I just want those strategies to be a unique challenge every duel where yeah, if you failed to break their board you lose, but, nowadays 'failing to break there board' just means you couldnt play through 3 negates and a floodgate instead of outing a towers or winda. If I wanted everyone to have the same deck and have games boil down to mind games then Id go play chess.
I agree with your sentiment! It should be more like MtG - while YGO can certainly have more options, Magic has the colors that generally focus on specific strategies within each one, but you can mix and match them to make the strategies in the deck more varied, strengthen those strategies that are shared by the colors, etc., but your consistency goes down when you do so, so it's an inherent cost/reward. Perhaps in YGO then, you'd have that as well - playing a pure Archetype deck makes it easier to do the Archetype stuff, but it's relatively narrow in application. Mixing other Archetypes (and generic support) that supplement the theme could make your deck more resilient, but less consistent in pulling off any of the strats you stuffed in there.
I agree with what you said
I was trying to make a armed dragon deck on master duel. The best end board i saw was a copy paste of a tribrigade board that ends with smorg and avian. Like it's basically the same game play just more limited in design. Dont get wrong infinite negates is busted, but it doesn't feel... good
Check out Sparado's TCG Armed Dragon Link build. Small World finally dropped, so all the main pieces are here. Usually ends on Armed Dragon Thunder 10 + dragon goodstuff
@@gangadharkatragadda8418 that's who uploaded the multiple negate board lol. I just wasnt a fan.
It didn't end on dragons I mean. He had the infinite negate loop. His earlier videos didnt have it but those boards weren't really good then and definitely arent now
I agree with you Paul, I love building Archetype based decks, they are lots of fun. I have to admit I do have 1 Hope Harbinger in my Blue-eyes Deck lol, but honestly it rarely gets played over something like my Blue-Eyes Alternative Ultimate Dragon or Blue-Eyes Chaos MAX Dragon. Love seeing new content here and on the other channel, love watching Team APS videos, honestly brings me plenty of positivity when I'm feeling down so thank you all. Also, just felt like mentioning here as well that I am also working on a fun Dice themed deck as a good tribute for the late-great Kazuki Takahashi. You guys have a great day.
Totally agree with you there.
One of the many reasons I fell in love with D/D's.
One of the few decks that stays on theme for the most part.
Also, Galaxy-Eyes, D-Link (to a lesser degree), Branded Despia, Dinomorphia (what you making besides Rexstrum and Kentregina?), RDA Resonator, Yusei.deck (aka Synchron), Code Talkers, EARTH Machines.
@@yusheitslv100 dlink isn't even an archtype bruh
@@eleonarcrimson858 Rokket/Borrel is the backbone of the deck's combos, and 3 of the deck's bosses and a good number of its combo pieces are on theme for.
@@eleonarcrimson858 I also said EARTH Machines, and you didn't say anything about it. Lol.
@@yusheitslv100 i didn't have a comment on ur general point. i just fixed the notion that dlink is an archtype. dlink is a showcase of the player base creative deck building.
Buddyfight had the right idea of limiting what type of cards you could run in your deck to remain in theme. Don't get me wrong, I like using decks build with variety, but whenever a strong generic card releases it's almost a staple. It's one thing for it to be support, and another to become the crux of your whole strategy.
This discussion reminds me of a deck profile I saw a few months ago. It was a “gravekeeper” deck profile that only ran 3 field and 3 commandant to tutor it up. The rest of the deck was just flood gates and generic good cards. Just like in the discussion I don’t view that as an actual gravekeeper deck. I would love to see creativity but not to that degree.
Awesome video. I just had this Convo with some ppl on MD. I try my best to use the boss monsters for my deck, but I always end up making Barroone, Dracco, etc.
This was my biggest issue with getting into the game. I’ve always had a love for the game, but it gets super repetitive when the best boss monsters are all generic.
I can’t even explain how strongly I agree with this. It’s so boring that every deck on master duel just goes into Halq and Auroradon combos and makes the same end board. It makes every game feel so stale and boring.
Konami has a history of straight up banning archetype boss monsters and leave generic ones untouched unless it's a floodgates. Construct, Thunder dragon colossus, towers come to mind. Cards like Herald of the arclight, abyss Dweller, Fleur, Borreload Savage dragon etc. (+many more) will never be banned.
Thunder Dragon Colossus is a monster I REALLY hope returns. It was one of the only saving graces my Watt deck had 😭
Dweler IS well same for Herald . I Don't see any problem with fleur .
@@KikiCatMeow too powerful...
@@skream2018 it ain’t that bad. If DPE and Dragoon are able to stay I don’t see why Colossus can’t
I agree. Everyone uses the same cards - Baronne, Accesscode, Borrelsword, the ghost girl hand traps, etc.
I even feel that it’s gotten to the point where people put in all the same hand traps and stuff, and then put in 2-3 cards from the actual theme and still call it “___ deck” when in reality it’s just hand trap decks with hardly any archetype cards. Like if I wanna play darklords I want to use actual darklords cards, not all the same cards everyone else uses and have like 3 darklords cards. It makes everything so uninspired now.
I fully agree with this, and it's sad that we have dozens of archetypes but they all end up utilizing 10-12 of the same monsters for the end board. Archetypes are becoming engines for the best cards in the game.
Appolousa, Savage, Baronne. Go ahead.
Another benefit to generic boss monsters is that it can bring life to older decks that are lacking support.
Recently have the same feeling with the new fur hire support, pretty much everyone saw that as "this doesn't benefit my borrelsword/apollousa board" and I went like, "well yeah bc it's meant to play better with the in archetype cards and boss monsters" for me even the mentality while building a deck has changed to only consider something good if it give you access to the generic extra deck monsters leaving behind everything else
Kinda sad that the archetype specific monsters to support a specific archetype are deemed useless because it doesnt help their generic deck
My mentality is
“Can I get mirrorjade off of this?”
this plagues every deck in the game. even what I'm running right now, Face knights, just used the kings queens Jack's and jokers to make oppalosa or constellar monsters, link into isolde, summon immortal phoenix Garfield. it's kinda sad.
@@thezestylime0989 I mean, to be fair, Face Knights were originally made to get out big monsters...the Egyptian Gods. Hell, Thunderspeed Summon is a card meant for Face Knights and Slifer
@@Xios_Angelis funnily enough one of the things you can do with thunder speed summon is search sphere mode and get rid of your opponents board on their turn.
This is why ive said for the last 6 years or so that the game has gotten extremely samey, decks don't feel like decks they just feel like engines that get your extra deck cards out. Everything is so combo centric there is no tempo or meaningful choices to make in a match.
Sadly that's just what yugioh is. That's why i play older archetypes in casual master duel matches
I like how Speedroids did it, it doesnt lock you into Speedroids specifically but just Wind and Synchros
i totally feel the same way, ive been gravitating towards decks that dont even use extra decks, or dont run handtraps and are all gas, not really sure how to solve this issue but power creep is real and konami likes money
nice. i play speedroids in order to win by all gas and recursion, still use an extra deck ofc.
The only decks I play that are extra deck reliant are thunder dragons and galaxy-eyes in master duel. Other than that it’s phantasm spiral or starry night that don’t require extra deck. They’re not diamond level decks but I have fun playing them and it’s satisfying when I beat cancerlich, or snoresoul
I know exactly what you mean bro I felt this watching some deck profile vids and they just go into a bunch of extra deck stuff that has nothing to do with the archetypes
The best "fix" is to make archetype boss monsters stronger and harder to make outside of archetype. Magikey Transfurlmine is a good example.
Nope. We need less archetype and more generic cards. So people can create thier own strategy instead of copy and paste
@@CardGamesTV1 That won't work and it will just create more copy and paste decks
@@CardGamesTV1 That's not happening right now with strong generic cards and there are plenty of copy and paste pile decks.
@@CardGamesTV1 I think we need a healthy balance of both. I think Baronne and psychic end are great generics
@@CardGamesTV1 Generics make the opposite, since there is no deckbuilding downside to them you can put them in any deck, making decks even more similar.
Just a couple days ago on master duel I played 4 different people in a row where my opponent ended their turn with DPE and barron on their field I just turned my game off and haven't touched it since that's kinda just how the game is now creativity kinda went right out the window
The problem doesn't fall in line with the players, but Konami.
Konami refuses to make GOOD series of boss monsters for each archetype so we wouldn't have to run generic options.
Your right and plus they never make cards from the anime like the ancient gear hunting hound fusion monsters and other cards that are shown in the anime but never produced
Yup It all just comes down to Konami not making the archetype boss monster stronger so it's up for consideration with the generic ones
It's also an issue of set construction as well. So many sets only have a handful of playable cards in them and if they are boss monsters, they can sell more packs if the 1 broken card in a set is generic and can be played in a lot of decks.
Even if there's an entire good archetype and boss monster only the people trying to play that new archetype are gona buy the set vs anyone whos deck can make a lv 8 syncro, rank 4, etc.
Just ban the generic broken Extra deck boss Monsters
They only make them when Albaz or Visas is involved.
Very awesome point. I felt that a while ago.
A good way to tone down this problem maybe when they design a boss card it should be: good effect yes, but a really busted option related to the theme of the archetype it belong.
The New starving venom is a good example in my opinion and the fact that a lot of players find it trash is actually the problem
It doesn't feel like I'm playing the arc type for the arc type.
Facts!!! Couldn't have said it better myself
It does when you play sky strikers 😬
I completely agree! I've been wanting to work on a deck that have a theme. But everywhere you look, every time I look up ideas on how to go about it, they all have the same 7 or 8 extra deck cards as well as the same other main deck stuff...
I totally agree your point. Recently I wanted to make a syncron and I wanted to make stardust boss monsters but…..it was difficult.
I really liked your point of view. Because this happened to me recently. I started playing with an infernoble deck. And when it started it was a more pure build because I didn´t like to finish on endboards with other boss monsters. And as I digged deeper in combo videos, all the negates where endboards with random generic big monsters. So I was playing the endboard deck, not the archetype deck. And what makes you fall in love (at least for me) with an archetype is the artwork, lore or style of play. So I totally agree with your view.
I've been feeling this recently, I've gravitated more toward decks that want to play their own cards Despia has been my go to for this reason. I want to summon all the built in Albaz and Despia bosses for various reasons and their power level rewards me for it.
The abusing the best extra deck monsters of X format has always been a thing but, I think the peak of the pyramid in Baron, Accesscode and Appolousa warp the game around them because they are so well rounded, have simple summoning requirements. Older monsters used to fit into being the right tool for the specific job, Stardust prevents 1 destruction effect, Silent honour ark solves 1 problem monster, Zenmaines is tough to remove etc.
I think generic strong monsters should be designed like say Naturia beast, can shut down certain decks but not all and have stricter entry requirements (earth monsters or bust in NB case.) Much as I love Trishula it probably should have had the word water in one of it's materials.
Or as an alternative monsters like Accesscode should have parcelled off some of it's effects to when it is made with code monsters. like the attack gain or unresponsive clause only works when summoned via code talker etc.
Love the channel and videos, I don't view critique of the game as negative and appreciate it.
Yeah.
I already had it when Borrelsword was the end-all-be-all of turn enders. Apoll is another prime example. I do still not own a copy of that card simply because I do not like the premise of the card. Super generic, up to 4 negates.
Some better designed generic boss monsters would be cool. Having them require monsters from their archetype. Like with Savage Dragon maybe only being able to equip a dark dragon link monster. Accesscode only being able to banish Code Talker link monsters to pop things. Baronne de Fleur needing the Fleur Synchron/Necro Synchron to be able to negate things and pop things.
That would give incentives to play the cards from the archetype the boss monster belongs to.
I love seeing the archetypal boss monsters of Dragunity but every profile and gameplay video just makes baronne.
I felt they almost immediately after building my first combo deck in Master Duel. I'm a new player who only ever played MD. It was about five minutes of setting up an infernoble board, though that one did have an archetype boss Charles. And it was the weakest thing on the board, only there for ripping one card from hand.
There’s always going to be something that’s broken or not optimal. The last time a deck made a special ED monster we all complained. You want to be optimal and if you want to play casually then play the archetypes boss monster, no one is stopping you
Dingirsu was a meta deck boss monster in orcust it’s own archetype so no not just in casual play
@@saif19845 any level 8 spam deck could play it before it got power crept, it was a popular option to protect the Buster lock in dragon link too
@@NewtBannner when did dingirsu get power crept? people still play unicorn send without targeting is still good
@@saif19845 how many meta decks play Dingirsu? Don’t get me wrong I really like the card, I still play it in my Dragon Link deck at locals and MD but competitively it hasn’t been good for a couple years
@@NewtBannner that's more of an issue with the decks that happen to be meta rather than ding, any deck that can will still run ding
Honestly, I kind of limit myself to archetypes where my best play IS their archetype boss monster. Evil Twins, Unchained, Sushi Ships, etc. Beyond that I sometimes splash a second engine as an option, like DPE, but i always make sure the deck im playing doesnt end up using DPE as its go to, instead as a back up plan.
So true! Thank you for articulating this. I feel it does take away from the fun of the game a bit
As an Agents player myself, i 100% agree. Heck, the combo i use typically ends my board with masterflare, halq, and the link parshath. during the other player's turn you use the halq and get TG wonder magician to pop an artifact scythe, then use it to get baronne with an archlord kristya from parshath. no extra deck or special summons when it works.
I've been getting success with a few other decks that use little to no generic support as well.
blackwings, Genex , darklords, super quantums, mayakashi, etc
This is why HERO is my favorite deck and why I’ve stopped playing most of my other decks. It’s such a great feeling to summon bosses that are all in-archetype. It feels like you’re forced to splash engines and generic extra deck bosses into most other rogue decks because they don’t have enough competent support on their own to function, or it’s not as good.
I’ve had the same problem for years. I like building theme decks and not using generic bosses because its not fun. I recently made a Galaxy/Cipher deck on master duel and its been a lot of fun since I’m sticking to the theme and it takes me back to the zeal/arc-v era and its fun trying to think and play like Kite Tenjo. I dont like generic bosses being strong because like Paul said it takes too much away from decks that specialize in a specific archetype
I understand the issue is real for me. I always try to make my decks have their own identity while also trying to remain playable. The generics offer cheap power in deck building, an is why Konami makes $. So I doubt they be any desire for them to buff themed cards vs generic ones.
Thanks for making this video. I am an older YuGiOh player (50) and came back to the game last year along with a friend. The one thing I haven't really card for is everyone's end board looks the same. When looking at TH-cam videos for tips, people always seems to be aiming for the same ole thing. I feel that so many people ignore the boss monsters for that archetype. It also seems like people put so many generic cards in their deck that the actual archetype makes up only a small percentage of their decks. I definitely feel like something has been lost in this game. I feel like many of the generic cards need to be more archetype specific.
I think it's lousy future-proofing on Konami's side, you can see it even in master duel, whenever a new generic good card is added every deck uses it to the point where archetypes don't really matter In deck building, since there are all engines to pull the same 4 cards
It’s why I make fun of any non destiny hero deck having dpe…of course
As a returning old school player who recently got back through master duel, I can absolutely relate to this. It's a bit sad that, just like any kind of competition (including the music business) tends to create a meta / mainstream which seems to be the most profitable in the long run but kills the individuality.
Me and all of my Yu-Gi-Oh friends have all had this same discussion. We don't like how all these combos and combo guides lead to the same monster. We look at team samurai videos and it's just another copy of the same meta strategies. And it's like this for many Yu-Gi-Oh combo guides. It is not a fun way to do, it is efficient... But not as fun as when you play a more pure deck or when you're using an archetype and actually get out the archetype boss monster, it just feels more rewarding.
Every deck ends with baronne dagda i:p and some other generic cards and rarely maybe 1 of archetype boss.
check my channel out with deck profiles i im real creative with my decks i own the cards as well always do unique stuff never have same end boards they are meta and different
As you say this look at trif channel.... team sam show casing a blue-eyes deck that won which isn't even a pure blue-eyes deck at all and it has no fusions what so ever..
the point here is highlighted here very clearly.Negation addiction is the problem how did this come about by genericness and the way to easily sell cards. The main issue is deck guides in Yu-Gi-Oh are all competitive no one just has a deck guide for fun or casual times. konaminis trying to mitigate somewhat with board breakers. whether it can be solved I really don't now
I pointed out this issue years ago but it’s becoming more prevalent than ever now. This was the same problem with the end of the GOAT era, synchro era, and other periods in the game. Every deck was required to play so much generic “good stuff” in order to compete to the point that every deck looked basically the same minus the 10 or so cards you used to enable those broken cards to get the deck up to an even 40 and give it some semblance of a “theme” so it wasn’t just DM Staples: The Deck. It feels like the best modern decks are the ones that can play the smallest amount of in-archetype cards in order to leave room for the “good stuff”. That’s why things like Prank-Kids, Tenyi, etc. were popular. It was like 12 cards you could put into a deck with 18+ handtraps and however many draw/starter spells you can fit. Master Duel has really opened my eyes to how generic the game has become. Whenever I’m looking into making a new deck I find out I already have 75% or more of the extra deck and main deck crafted, I just need the archetypal stuff and maybe some slightly less generic staples (Allure of Darkness comes to mind, or maybe your chosen archetype gains advantage off of playing Droplet rather than Imperm, etc) that enable it. You could definitely make counter arguments to some of this, and I know there are exceptions to every rule, but I guarantee you didn’t buy all of those Adventure cards to play the pure version of the deck.
Also shoutout to Swordsoul for having 3 incredible in-archetype boss monsters worth building a deck around, even if they do lean on Baronne and Yang Zings to get there. They haven’t been relevant in awhile but Cyber Dragons were always good about that too.
I feel like I have to put in hand traps even if they don't mess well with my deck
Yup, if you don’t want to get aggressively bum rushed, you have to run hand traps.
I’m working on a coin flip control deck right now. I’ve given up on trying to get to Diamond 1 after DPE came out.
u do becuz of the generic stuff and even then they may not help
I can't speak for YGO Master Duel, but in the TCG not every deck needs handtraps in our current format. If your deck has enough gas going first, with tons of going-second cards like Raigeki, Harpie's Feather Duster, or Evenly Matched in the Side Deck, or if it's just straight-up a going-second deck, you don't need as many handtraps.
In fact, many of the decks that won the most recent YCS weren't running handtraps, such as Drytron (Unless you count Herald of Orange Light, a card that isn't generic).
That's a you sucking at the game thing. Not a problem with the game. 😆
The only "hand trap" I run are infinite imper. And evenly matched which technically are and are not because they don't have to be activated from the hand. Decks now are built to play through handtraps so they aren't as much of a threat than in the past.
Well, when i was testing agents combos i was focusing in the coppying efect of the level 10 sincro, searthing the sky sanctuary trap or doing a venus combo to make herald sincro with ties that binds to searth valkyrie and the statue.
I really like using these "tribal" sinergis
This is why I play Dinosaurs. Ultimate Conductor Tyranno is one of the few Main Deck boss monsters left. Scrap-Dino can also make Dolkka and Laggia which are like XYZ Dino boss monsters. But UCT can still disrupt boards which is awesome.
Yeah but UCT still falls into the generic boss monster category since dinosaur isn't an archetype.
I agree with you Paul! When I build the deck I try to use as much cards from the Archetype as possible including to trap and spells where fit. As new as it is its already old to see DPE in every decks end board. I want to make Armytile the Chaos Phantasm in Sacred Beasts and similar graphics to other decks, they should make boss monsters more worth while the more from the Archetype they have in with it.
I definitely got a similar feeling. Especially if those end boards are cards some can't afford. That why I like about some decks like D/D/D. They are good as an engine on its own. But don't get me wrong. It's also cool to have some generic stuff too. It really brings creativity to the card game. A deck I think of is like the base deck a format back. Sure it was a bit too crazy but the fact people were able to create such a synergy was pretty cool. I get both sides in a way.
Great video Paul. It sounds like what the game needs is some balancing, I've only started getting back into the game recently and watching videos to teach me the stuff I've missed, but what I've found is that everyone seems to play the same deck, there are over 10K cards and people only pick from the same couple of hundred cards
Deck building kind of lost its charm when pile decks started becoming more of a thing, imo.
Like everyone runs the same engine it seems like, there's not much variety anymore. That's why I like duel links so much lately. There's so many decks running around there and it feels like everyone has a chance, to an extent.
I dunno, I'm just rambling
Isn't pile decks more or less the best in deck building?
Imo they express creativity and skill vs following an archetype.
But I can see your point of the same engines being used
I get where you're coming from, I get pile deck's aren't everyone's cup of tea, for me personally though I think pile decks are super cool, like being able to look at all the different little interactions between the engines and all that is super fun for me
Not saying you're view is wrong, just expressing my thoughts on it
@@Omegaman4321 No when you put it like that, I get what you mean. It's like the reply above, it does take skill to see what all clicks with what. But in the end, they're probably running a modified version of the same engine everyone else is, or as Paul stated, trying to make the same generic Boss monster
Yeah 2005 is when deck building lost its charm
To be fair, the moment they added handtraps is the moment every deck became the same. No deck goes without 3 ash 3 maxx c 3 imperm. Maybe less of them, but even strict archetypes like hero, despia, and floo will all run these handtraps. Every opening strategy is the same where you just pray you hvae atleast 2 handtraps. You either make a baroness or appolussa, then you maybe make your archetype boss monster. There is no way for yugioh to fix this unless they actually commit to resetting the power level of the game. They almost did it with links, but they fumbled really hard when all they did was make link generic board spam that was even more broken than release synchro.
I agree with you, 100%.
I'm kind of a newcomer to the game, about 2 years of playing. I started because my son watched the anime, then we bought some starter decks for fun. Shortly after, I found out one of my best friends loved the game when we were kids, back when the show was first aired in America. He has played off and on with some friends and cousins since.
My buddies dark magician Deck was killing my structure decks, so I started getting singles from TCG player and watching all sorts of you tube videos on deck profiles and tips (which lead me to APS channels - great stuff by the way).
I now have built 8 decks, and I see this being an identity issue, like you expressed. The originality is killed and the thought of winning a duel will come down to if you are using these newly released 'meta' cards that seem out of place for your theme.
Everyone will play the same cards, or have a pathetic duel to the point you can feel bad about how you just board locked and destroyed your opponent or friend. I'd rather have this game be 'competitive' and not force your design of a strong deck.
3:30 I felt this. Zoodiacs are by far my favourite deck, but having to go into Zeus, utopic Draco future, or megaclops pretty much every time gets boring quick, and takes away from the special feeling of using a specific archetype. Though of course that is just my opinion.
Absolutely. Recently build a blue eyes deck and all the combo videos i was looking up just go straight to baronne. Thankfully i found a youtuber named jonikku who plays pure blue eyes on masterduel. Im thankful that I was able to at least learn some combos from him and what end boards I can make. Not trying to promote him but I feel the only way you can actually learn is by finding someone who 1 tricks a deck and makes content solely with that type of architype
Yu-Gi-Oh has always had generic cards that would be jammed into every deck, even before Synchros came out. Generic staples are all over the game's history, and making a list of them would be long and strenuous. That said, I do like the idea of generic boss monsters being weaker than archetypal ones. Archetypal boss monsters can usually only be made by their own archetype, or have effects that only benefit their archetype, so it makes sense that, given their restrictions, they should be more powerful than generic boss monsters.
Having generic staples that aren't boss monsters was not what it is today. You still had boss monsters per archetype you needed that archetype to run. Now most decks aren't even viable without a generic boss monster thrown in. What makes it worse is it's usually a boss monster from a archetype that needed the support to be viable but that support is made super generic an splashable.
You haven't noticed the most ban heavy/requested cards are all generic boss monsters these days? Back in the day archetype cards were priority.
@@crowing3886 Black Luster Soldier - Envoy of the Beginning, Summoned Skull, Jinzo, Chaos Emperor Dragon (Pre-errata), Stardust Dragon, Black Rose Dragon, Trishula, Brionac, Dark Rebellion Xyz Dragon, Silent Honor Ark, Castel, Lightning Chidori, Firewall Dragon (Pre-errata), I could go on. The game has always had generic boss monsters.
@@diamondsanchez224 the generic cards existed, but Lightsworns and Gladiator Beasts were examples of powerful archetypes that didn't need to rely on generic boss monsters. A synchro deck might have a Stardust or Black Rose in the extra deck to help in a pinch, but the end goal was usually within-archetype.
@@joshuab3918 But just like how you had archetypes like those that were outliers, you still have archetypes like that today. Floowandereeze, Sky Strikers, Dinomorphia, Live-Twins, and Branded Despia all end on their in-archetype cards.
@@diamondsanchez224 Well, they weren't all the same first turn board with dedication of being decks main boss. First turn boards were different and those generic monsters were auxiliary tools, not the main bosses or win condition of the decks. Nowadays generic monsters are the boss monsters of many decks and they ALL generally end up being on the very first turn or at worst 2nd turn.
I actually had this problem while playing d/d/d, with it being able to go into zeus and baronne. Ultimately i decide to keep them out, and i had so much more fun being able to pivot into kuga and purple armageddon in situation where a negate and board clear were options
i mean yeah...with d/d/d you can decide to not play those cards because they have their own good boss monsters that can negate/interrupt.
Remember when dragoon was running rampant and every single lower tier deck just threw it in? it's the same philosophy imo. splashable engines etc. (adventure) homogenization sucks to see especially with a game with zero rotation.
I actually ran into this the other day. I play D/D/Ds and have been loving it. For a while I had Super Doom King Bright Armageddon (level 10 synchro) in the extra. I recently got a Baronne, so I made the switch even though it's harder to make due to D/D/D locks from some of the pieces.
Here is my takeaway from this video: the real problem is that the extra deck as a mechanic is itself too powerful, not too generic. If we look back at formats like Edison and the early XYZ era, the power level of individual extra deck cards was pretty low.
The ED for Edison is pretty much a copy-paste job for every single deck, but the difference is that your maindeck is really where the gameplay is happening. ED boss monsters didn’t really exist in the sense that you were tying to end on something and make it stick. Stardust was strong but never a game ender, and never something that every deck wanted to end on T1. It was an OPTION. The extra deck should be a tool box, NOT the lubricant for all of your plays.
So I propose (on top of weakening the power of generic extra deck monsters) we have more decks that end on MAINDECK boss monsters. God Phoenix Gierfried is a really cool example. The problem with this idea is that you have to actually design a combo deck to work without the ED, otherwise you’re just going to end up with decks like Flunder and Draco. But I think those decks are just as necessary for the game as wombo-combo.
Flunder is gross
I think more costs on generics ED monsters may help. Or simply making easier and more effective archetype boss monsters compared to generic bosses
look at the new Rescue monsters just announced for the OCG, main boss is a main deck card that looks like it will be easily sumonable, and basically just let's you set 4 back row from your deck. I think itll be extremely fun, but the meta plague will then just link it off for oppalosa or something...
@@Predaplanter why do you think that? Because it doesn't rely on net decking your ED? Because Empen was specifically designed to counter ED's that just end on a bunch of atk position omni negates? Because it can utilize D Shifter to prevent most of the meta from using their graveyard as a second hand?
@@Megidramon you're likely gonna try and lecture me on why other decks are worse or why it's not so bad no matter what I say right?
I've had this problem for years. I was saying yesterday that when it comes to improving how you play with a new deck or archetype, whether it's improving the deck or learning better uses of the cards you have, most "advice" offered is:
"Pfft! You're using THAT archetype! Lame. Use this one instead. It won worlds."
Or, you TECHNICALLY can use the deck, but only as an engine to bring out something else. And I like the idea of each deck having a worthwhile identity.
This is because handtraps have killed the ability to play things that aren't negates. If you don't build your negates up, you just lose to generic handtraps. So you have to use the generic boss monsters to survive.
I've been trying to get back into YGO because I love your videos and I've been feeling this so hard! Even if I'm playing a "non meta" deck all the deck lists online use these generic boss monsters. It makes it boring, and a little harder to learn how to use the actual archetypal combos. Totally with you on this
I agree with this fully and tbh I'm starting to hate master duel I feel like I run into the same decks or monsters every duel I have more fun on duel links
Same here but I don't have duel links
Just de-rank and commit to daily gem grind. You’ll make at least a little over 4K a month a keep the diversity of the game you like
I’m talking about with thousands of cards and combos, and you still run into the same deck 4 and 5 times
It is funny that you used that example on Blue-eyes as I have a video recently that did that very same thing you mentioned. I ended on Sheou, Hot red dragon and something else. It was cool, but it wasn't really a "blue-eyes" board. I do agree that there should be more locks to what you can summon for decks but I hope they would create boss monsters worth summoning for that lock. It would be creative to see the end boards but they need to be worth only playing that type.
Lots of people probably got into Yugioh cause of the anime and the cool artworks, so it sucks that not all decks that people love can be played competitively
I agree. I like to make team-up decks with two different archetypes, in which case it's really helpful when their respective boss monsters are generic. But using the boss monsters of the archetypes I'm playing is always the main point of the decks I build. And I'm really not a fan of the fact that these boss monsters can be played in pretty much every deck.
7 out of 10 people I matched with always end up with the monsters you mentioned, I've been playing the agents even before master flare Hyperion and the other support came out, and I miss the back and forth of old Yu-Gi-Oh unlike today where everything feels hopeless if you don't draw the right cards
I feel you 100% just got back into yugioh thanks to master duel. I’m collecting but also love playing w nice looking cards so I started thinking about building a deck until I realized that the game has lost a lot of the themed aspect. You don’t have to think too much to play those kinds of cards and I guess it’s to make a “kids “ game more approachable but I don’t feel confident in any deck I build without the “modern staples” you described. It’s nice to not know what’s coming and to have a few turns to see if you can play around it instead of the game just ending because of the obvious choices of successful boards to make.
I love water decks and pretty much every one has the toadally awesome package. It’s really like we choose a boss monster(s) and then an engine or archetype to support it because it’s the only way to stay somewhat competitive.
I know what you mean. I built and am currently playing a The Agent deck myself, and all the Extra Deck recommendations I find are like Baronne De Fleur, Borreload Savage, Apollousa and other generic boss monsters. Since I can't find them around here and I also can't spend the money they are worth, I decided to put a bit of a twist on mine, even if it's less powerful.
They're still generic monsters since this archetype doesn't have much besides Protector of the Agents Moon, Masterflare Hyperion and The Executor of the Underworld Pluto, but I decided to add Brionac, Trishula, Herald of Pure Light, BLS Soldier of Chaos (not budget but already had it so...). There are some "generic" monsters that work really well like Herald of Mirages.
But the problem is as you mention, there's too little archetypes with strong boss monsters that are only useful for that speciffic archetype, which is a real shame because in the end, they end up being "weak" or only used as means to get the generic board in the end. And so, the game ends up being about who builds the big boss board faster.
I totally see where you're coming from. I look at tons of deck blueprints and they all see like the same deck. Almost all decks running stuff like Ash Blossom. But seeing as it's a tough card for me to get, I just take the builds with a grain of salt and make my own. I also like keeping to archetypes unless I really need to mix in something that'll help the deck along. In my case, I've been working on a 98% pure HERO deck, but with a King of The Swamp mixed in.
I love these rants , don't know why people wouldn't! You touch on everything that is unlikeable or negative in the game and aren't coming from a place of that nature. It makes the videos a great watch and great for explaining to new players how the game overall is played and what is currently upsetting the fragile meta this game has.
Basically ghost reaper is more valuable than anyone understands if most people have a copy paste end board, copy paste those boards and reaper those problems.
I agree completely, that is exactly why I go for decks like heroes and dogmatika/shaddoll/invoked. Your boss monsters are of the archetype. I just always felt not satisfied summoning generics from the extra deck.
I agree with you. For example, I feel like Borreload Savage Dragon should have some kind of effect like "If you don't control a Borrel card, you must tribute this card at the end of your turn" or "You must equip a Borrel Link card in order to put Borrel Counter to this card."
I remember this being one of those things that I thought was so weird when I started. Like “the deck belongs to x archetype right? What are all these random extra deck monsters doing here?”
It’s one of those things that I basically got used to without realizing it, and honestly paul is the first person I’ve seen on yt to clearly voice this opinion on it
In Yu-Gi-Oh, it's simple. You can either win, or you can have fun.
I’m a pretty competitive player my self, and I have to say I kinda agree with you. The thing is that would require more archetype locking. If u think about it baronne, savage, hot red, accescode, are all technically a boss monster of their respective archetype. In ur case u mentioned the new Agent boss monster which btw is also generic so if it was worth using over baronne it would be used everywhere over baronne unless it had an in archetype exclusive use which made it worth it. In this specific case I find the combo capabilities that the new Hyperion synchro offer worth summoning over baronne if u are playing the shine ball combo. Over all I agree with u I wish there was more diversitiy in deck building and end boards. Great video!
Completely agree on this one. When I build a deck. My goal is to get that archetypes boss monster/s on the field
Main decks have just become extenders for the extra deck, you go always the extra mile in an archetypal deck or a themed deck..just to go back the same boss monsters in the extra deck. It is a repeated cycle. You really don’t have to invest time in a deck anymore imo because you just throw in the same extenders for a long play to just set your board up, that’s why I love watching you guys do casual duels…no generic extra boss, no repeated extenders, no hand traps.
Dragunity may actually be one of the few archetypes where you can stick to the cards (Bosses included) and compete. I was using them for the last few months until I switched to Fur Hire x Danger! And honestly only switched because of curiosity lol
Man I completely agree. I have been back and forth with Yu-Gi-Oh for a while, but when I got back into it I bought a lot of King's Court packs because I am just a big fan of the Court Cards in general (I love regular playing cards I always carry at least one pack on me) and the boss monsters where kinda cool too. So I got the cards went on to TH-cam to look at deck profile and not one of them had any of the boss monsters in the Extra deck it was just a way to summon Utopic Draco Future or Utopia Double or Nothing OTK. Utopic Draco Future and Utopia came with King's Court so it was expected for people to use them but damn I just wish these decks would also use the Court boss monsters since they have some pretty decent effects.
One thing I think would be better is if boss monsters for specific archetypes their effects should just get better if you used they archetypes for the summon or how many you have on the field/in the graveyard. I know some archetypes do this but not all of them do and it's a damn shame that they don't
I strongly agree with this video and your opinion. I'm a big fan of yugioh, and without a lot of people to play with, I tend to be drawn to Master Duel. The problem is that I don't find it fun using generic boss monsters or meta decks, I try to do the best I can with the decks I like. However, with Verte Anaconda, everyone has easy access to DPE as well as other generic boss monsters. Now whenever I play, if I am going second and don't have any negates, my opponents nearly always get a near unbreakable board with hand traps and multiple negates. This is basically making Master Duel unplayable once you reach platinum if you aren't running these generic boss monsters or meta decks.
I generally agree with you. I find it quite annoying going up against decks as well that have been playing a certain set of cards, then suddenly DPE or Access are on the field, just kind of feels like I have been cheated.
Feel you with that one, the only deck I play that makes it's own boss monster is ABC but that's ignoring the fact that I throw in Apollousa/Accesscode/IP etc because ABCs gimmick let's you plus off link climbing then fusing from GY.
Is it powerful and fun? Yeah, but I could just Splight and end on a similar board with better disruption since Toadally Awesome is fair
I think it depends on the archetype. For example, Infernity, one of my favourite decks, is all about making these crazy boards with lots of disruption whilst clearing out your hand to set up your breaks and barriers. The end board with some of the current versions involves Baronne, Borreload Savage, and Apollousa and I think this fits quite well in achieving what the deck does and has been known to do in all the variations it's had throughout the years. That being said, it would also be cool to feel like I could switch any one of those out for an Infernity Doom Dragon and feel like I'm not actively reducing my chances of winning the game.
Playing competitive is one thing but there is a reason people just surrender in causal duels once someone starts a negate board
If you didn’t want me to okay at all, shouldve just said so. Save you the trouble and not play someone like you to begin with
This is why I love D/D/D they are all cool looking monsters that like to work primarily with each other. You can use baron if you get the hand but you don’t even have an end board that’s not some good ddd monster. Siegfried, Gilgamesh High Wave King Casear, and now in master duel Deus X. And pretty all have some effects
I feel this, i recently got back into yugioh and was searching for a fun deck to play, really like libromancers so went to see some profiles.... of the 40 cards only like 9 were libromancers and they were just used as fodder to make halq, heatsoul, accesscode, masquerena, appolousa... you don't even use any of the libro monsters at all, made me really sad. Ended up getting weather painters, that recently got a cool boss monster pair and a nice way of putting them on board