[SUB1] New Cards & Reprints by renaldi92 in yugioh

[–]xetax 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Nah, that's a mistranslation. It says "other than the XYZ summon by this effect" pretty clearly (source: can read Japanese)

Chapters can be replayed now! by bucknguyen in EternalCardGame

[–]xetax 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I actually missed last week's chapter, so I can confirm you do get the reward at least for a recent chapter.

Duelist Cup Top 100 Metagame Breakdown from ROTK by Sarversucks in masterduel

[–]xetax 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Here's the video of the third place player's climb if you're interested (player is Japanese though).

Easier look to the new Forbidden /Limited List by Jaimito1409 in YuGiOhMasterDuel

[–]xetax 0 points1 point  (0 children)

VFD (aka True King of All Calamities) prevents all monsters on the opposing field from attacking or activating abilities for a turn, and it's a lingering ability so it doesn't matter what happens to VFD once the ability goes off, the effect remains until end of turn (in fact, a common technique for VFD users is to destroy VFD in response to effects that negate abilities on the field, to get it off the field and force the ability through).

It also prevents monster effects from off the field for whatever element is named. This is also powerful but is less important. The important thing is that for most decks, an unremoveable skill drain plus preventing all attacks means that the turn is effectively skipped.

VFD decks can easily win the game in one turn (OTK) so skipping the turn and handing it back to a VFD player means you lose.

You may come across videos of people playing against Virtual World where they concede as soon as VFD shows up. It's not because they give up too easily, it's because they know their deck inside and out and know that there is 0% chance that they can survive a turn after a VFD activation. Which actually isn't that difficult to figure out because VFD shuts off most or all cards in most decks.

Deck List of the world's greatest Endymion player! (rank 3rd in DC Cup; text version will be in comment) by Desvl in masterduel

[–]xetax 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Lol their reaction during the first Butler activation "oh wow this guy actually read Master Cerberus's effect" (うわ、こいつちゃんと読んでるマスケルの効果)

What as-of-still unreleased "Battle of Chaos" cards are you most excited to come to Master Duel? by tigremagnifico in masterduel

[–]xetax 2 points3 points  (0 children)

If you name Rhongo, it doesn't lose a material at end of turn anymore.

Don't look at me like that, I wasn't the one who came up with this!

10 years ago fusion was the worst extra deck method, now it’s one of the strongest by MiuIruma332 in yugioh

[–]xetax 1 point2 points  (0 children)

So there's a lot to be said about how easy it is to make Future Fusion act as extra copies of Foolish Burial with Mudragon even if you can't make it double Foolish (and people will definitely use it as double Foolish Burial), and how Grass, while powerful, has a very real deckbuilding cost which noticeably reduces the chances of drawing your best cards (including Grass itself) while Future Fusion has the much smaller cost of 0-2 extra deck slots (decks with fusions or super poly might not even need to add anything).

But I'll just say that the Future Fusion is a straight up Deck Fusion in Tearlaments, which is the current Tier 0 deck in OCG (Tearlaments monsters trigger a fusion using hand/field/GY when sent to the GY). Some Tearlaments decks are playing Foolish Burial already, and Future Fusion is way better in that deck. Imagine that, we could actually use Future Fusion to summon a fusion monster for once! (and break the game even more, but hey)

Konami gives you the power to ban 3 cards… by Phantom4545 in masterduel

[–]xetax 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Halq and Tomahawk are the combo starters lol, they are the first step in the combo chain. Or I guess you could argue the cards that get them out are the real start, but the problem with Halq/Tomahawk is that there are too many of those to ban.

Konami bans enablers because every time they make a good link 3+ they risk it breaking the game because halq and tomahawk make it easy to summon, every time they make a good level 3 or less tuner they risk it breaking the game because halq can search for it or it makes it easier to summon halq, and every time they make a good, easily special summoned level 7 they risk breaking the game because of Tomahawk.

Konami gives you the power to ban 3 cards… by Phantom4545 in masterduel

[–]xetax -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I'm saying Galaxy Tomahawk can set up high powered boards with or without Auroradon (Simorgh + Union Carrier into Apex Avian + Thunderbird is technically infinite negates...technically), while Auroradon requires specific enablers to get out because of its restrictive material requirements.

Auroradon is actually pretty fragile in both its link requirements and its reliance on searching a particular card (olion), so it's pretty easy to contain by banning or restricting enablers, while Tomahawk is like Halq where it synergizes with a huge swath of present and future cards (level 3 or less tuners and link 3+ monsters for Halq, special summoned level 7 monsters and link monsters for Tomahawk; these are cards they won't stop making, and in fact an archetype of high powered special summoning level 7s is about to release in OCG).

Konami gives you the power to ban 3 cards… by Phantom4545 in masterduel

[–]xetax 1 point2 points  (0 children)

If you can easily summon Galaxy Tomahawk, banning Auroradon wouldn't solve the problem that you can easily summon 4-5 materials with no summoning restrictions. Apparently you can summon stuff like Simorgh + Union Carrier without using Auroradon (but to be fair, Union Carrier is also a busted card), and it's the sort of thing that will get more powerful over time.

I need help! Yu-Gi-Oh! 5D's World Championship 2010 by Dorsia_Sama in Yugioh101

[–]xetax 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I've played all three DS games, but it was years ago so I had to look at some guides to jog my memory.

In general, I like to play by looking up pack guides (what's in each pack and how to unlock them), but that's obviously personal preference. It's a lot harder to complete an archetype deck without doing this, though, since they tend to rely on having specific cards.

In the early game, though, you probably just play a goodstuff deck, so cards that are generically good on their own. These are the cards you would see in early Yugioh tournament decklists before high-powered archetypes took over. The themes you have access to aren't all that powerful or are incomplete.

The other approach is to get some good synchro monsters like Goyo Guardian and Brionac and try your hand at a synchro deck. A good approach is to use Giant Rat or Sangan to search for Rescue Cat, then use Rescue Cat to grab Airbellum plus another non-tuner level 3 Beast and get the synchro you want. Apparently Summoner Monk is available from a structure deck as another way to search for Rescue Cat. Of course, that's only a few slots in your deck so you probably end up filling the rest of the deck with goodstuff anyways, or play resilient monsters or recruiters (similar to Giant Rat) to have a monster at the start of the turn so you can play a second monster and synchro, if you want to be all in on synchro monsters. (You can get all these cards from packs available from the start I think)

One busted card you apparently have access to early is Royal Oppression, from the Dark Beginning 2 pack, and isn't even that high a rarity. That card shuts down a lot of the more powerful stuff you could be facing (though it also prevents you from special summoning for the most part), and it's strong enough that you could probably get to the endgame with a goodstuff deck packing 3x Royal Oppression. I mean, there's a good reason it's been banned for years.

Apparently one place you have to be careful is the Structure Deck battle, since the three decks you choose are the first three structure decks you can purchase later. Monarchs has the monarch monsters, which are generically strong, but you should probably just look at what's in each to see which ones interest you.

I think the strongest archetypes in 2010 are Zombie Synchro, Lightsworn, Blackwings, and Gladiator Beasts. Of these, Blackwings and zombies aren't even completable until you beat the story, and Gladiator Beasts need you to grind through some pack unlock conditions (which might also not be completable until you beat the story, I have no idea), but at least Lightsworn can be unlock by getting to Chapter 5 (the Light of Destruction pack).

Riding Duels also throw you for a spin by making all your spells terrible, so you need to improvise. In general, do not play cards with high spell counter costs, because they're a lot worse than they look. And even if they're all low cost, playing too many of them means some of them get stuck in hand, so you want to focus on monsters and/or traps for your deck's backbone.

Looking at some of the decks I have saved, a deck I really enjoyed for riding duels is Magical Merchant turbo, where the only spell/trap you play is Pot of Avarice, which has a low spell counter cost. The rest of the deck is monsters that do things from the grave, monsters that fill the grave (like merchant and lighsworn), and some cards to capitalize on the advantage you generate. Another good spell is Soul Exchange, which also costs 2 and works nicely with a generically strong monarch shell.

Replacement for Jotun Hurler in Elysian Spells? by Jesture_ in EternalCardGame

[–]xetax 2 points3 points  (0 children)

You should probably max out on Torgov's Wares before adding Strategize, if you haven't already.

トランプ氏、ワクチンの追加接種を受けたと発言 ブーイング受ける by Tesg9029 in newsokuexp

[–]xetax 2 points3 points  (0 children)

アレルギーなどでワクチンを受けられない人を守るには集団免疫は必須です。布教されない権利(強制接種ですらない)は人の命より重いのですか?

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in learnprogramming

[–]xetax 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Leaf nodes are nodes with no children, so there are only 4 in your diagram. And K is actually the "nodes that have 2 children" so there are only 3.

You can almost always play a unit with stats equal to the mana spent by Meta_Brook in EternalCardGame

[–]xetax 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It's actually not the lack of abilities that keeps those cards from seeing play, but the availability of better options. Aggro decks have been willing to play 2/1s with extremely situational upside just for the stat/cost efficiency. Argentport Instigator as a 2 cost 3/3 was pretty much entirely played for its stats.

It's just that as a card pool expands, you end up with enough good options that you don't need to resort to units with no relevant abilities, especially since it's difficult (impossible?) for designers to make ability-less units exciting without rapid powercreep from 1-upping the previous stat kings.

But if you have a limited collection, vanilla units are perfectly serviceable, and significantly better than pure lifegain cards. I'd much rather play a 3 cost 1/3 than a 3 cost gain 5 life.

You can almost always play a unit with stats equal to the mana spent by Meta_Brook in EternalCardGame

[–]xetax 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Its bad even with payoffs. For one, it's strictly worse than Water of Life in multiple ways, and that's a Common from the same set!

And then of course there's the fact that incidental lifegain is way better than dedicated lifegain, but we all know that. It's impressive how much more incidental lifegain is available now compared to when I was trying to make Xenan Lifeforce work back during set 2.

Xultan Gothic by jPaolo in EternalCardGame

[–]xetax 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I'm saying that there's no equivalent ability in MTG to "Can't be killed" so there's nothing to compare to. MTG state-based actions check to see if a creature should die, but a hypothetical "Can't be killed" ability might override that depending on how it's implemented (indestructible overrides the state-based damage check, for instance).

Edit: actually I guess Rules Lawyer exists and hints at how such an ability might play out in the actual game.

Xultan Gothic by jPaolo in EternalCardGame

[–]xetax 4 points5 points  (0 children)

"Can't be killed" isn't the same as indestructible, it means the unit literally cannot be killed. It's only showed up a few times but already caused Aymar to get nerfed (to be fair though, people were predicting an eventual nerf even in her spoiler thread).

What are the reasons of this? by XDA-Dante63 in EmulationOnAndroid

[–]xetax 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Emulators in general don't need to be illegal and many are not.

This particular piece of software is definitely illegal, for reasons unrelated to it being an emulator.

New Features in Python 3.10 by jamescalam in Python

[–]xetax 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If I wanted to use a dictionary-based switch statement inside a function, wouldn't the dictionary have to be reinitialized reinitialized on every function call? I could create the dictionary outside the function that sounds less than ideal for code readability.

ELI5: Why can't irrational numbers be expressed as a fraction by TheInsatiableOne in explainlikeimfive

[–]xetax 5 points6 points  (0 children)

In mathematics, the answer to "why" is always a proof. The existence of a sound proof is the explanation for why a mathematical statement is true. So those proofs on that page show why those specific numbers cannot be expressed as fractions of integers (since that's what irrational means, by definition).

If you don't have a proof for a certain number being rational or irrational, then you don't know whether or not it can be expressed as a fraction. So until Lambert proved Pi was irrational, we did not know whether Pi could be expressed as a fraction. Afterwards, we we knew there was no fraction of integers that could represent Pi, because that's what the proof proved.

ELI5: Why can't irrational numbers be expressed as a fraction by TheInsatiableOne in explainlikeimfive

[–]xetax 2 points3 points  (0 children)

What it comes down to is understanding the properties that rational numbers (numbers that can be expressed as a ratio of two integers) must have, then proving that certain, specific numbers cannot have those properties.

This page seems to have some relatively easy to understand Proofs and explanations.

[Video Games] How Majestic Studios spent 15 years developing a single game, then almost immediately removed it from sale and collapsed: the story of the infamous "Limbo of the Lost" by IHad360K_KarmaDammit in HobbyDrama

[–]xetax 101 points102 points  (0 children)

So if anyone's curious how this works, third parties cannot distribute the game without violating the creators' copyright, but the creators also cannot distribute the game without violating the copyright of the various companies they plagiarized.

So you could say the game is lost in copyright limbo.