Well, banning it is one easy solution but I am also not convinced about the state of the metagame after that is done. So, there might be other solutions in the same vein as doubling how much Bursts are worth that we have not explored yet.

We've explored this and tried it as part of the experimental format, but the reaction was pretty negative all-around. The whole idea behind deck format was to reduce the homogeneity of combos being used, but because a whole tournament ran this way would be unviable its impact is limited only to the finals.

@[Thunder Dome], what impact did you think that the experimental format had on combo selection, particularly in the finals? I was re-reading your post on it and you mentioned that not many people actually switched during the finals, which surprised me.

Stuff like 2-point wins and loser switching were gameplay elements designed to incentivize skill-based attack play and apply pressure against using "safe" stamina combos like Deathscyther (which can outspin a lot but is easy to counter in the next round). However, the feedback to those rule adjustments has been pretty mixed.

Stuff like 2-point wins and loser switching were gameplay elements designed to incentivize skill-based attack play and apply pressure against using "safe" stamina combos like Deathscyther (which can outspin a lot but is easy to counter in the next round). However, the feedback to those rule adjustments has been pretty mixed.

Keep in mind that Deathscyther's major counter (Valkyrie) also has huge issues with wear and Bursting, so double-valued Bursts increase both the potential reward and the risk. Since Attack is risky to begin with, I can definitely understand why more people would stick with their Deathscyther mirror matches in hope of out-launching their opponent.

---

Threads and combos!

Spoiler (Click to View)

[LTD] MF Jade Horogium 85RSF
[LTD] RB / RSF Attack
[LTD] Ronin Genbull (Crystal Up) 85RF
MF-H Phantom (Attack) Cancer 85RB
MSF-H Wyvang Ifraid GB145RF {Alternative to Wyvang^2 with more Upper Attack}
MSF-H Genbull Genbull 85RSF {Improved version of the above Phantom combo}
Balro Begirados 100RF {LTAC with both Upper Smash and regular Smash}
[LTD] MF-H Lightning L-Drago 85RB {more controllable Lightning LTAC}
[LTD] Burn Orion 105SF {Destabilizer}

I feel like you guys are ignoring what's going to happen if you ban Deathscyther. Right now, it seems as if everyone has forgotten that Valkyrie exists, which, as previously mentioned (and probably ignored) hard counters Deathscyther. Banning Deathscyther closes the doors to a lot of viable combos and leaves you with what will most likely be a two combo format (D2 and Odin) which is not very fun in the slightest.

I used a Deathscyther combo at the BeyDays event I attended. Can confirm, Deathscyther is OP. (Source: I won the Burst format)

Sorry, but, this tournament was months ago, was it not? I feel like the meta has changed a bit since then. Also, a lot of the combos used at that tournament didn't really seem that competitive in the first place. No one used Valkyrie against you, except for the first round, which you lost.

What vulnerabilities does Deathscyther have that Dark Deathscyther and Odin don't have? The teeth wear out but a new Deathscyther is definitely better than either of those two other parts in practically every way. I would like you both to explain what currently beats Deathscyther, and how the meta without Deathscyther would be worse.

As mentioned, Deathscyther loses to Valkyrie pretty badly. Did you forget that it exists? That's what it seems like. I feel like I'm just echoing what Brad said because you clearly side stepped it and continued to press your same points into the ground, despite being proven otherwise.

I'm wholeheartedly against Deathscyther being banned.

---

https://worldbeyblade.org/Thread-Beyblad...pid1530998

PLEASE READ MY STORY PLEASE ^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Stuff like 2-point wins and loser switching were gameplay elements designed to incentivize skill-based attack play and apply pressure against using "safe" stamina combos like Deathscyther (which can outspin a lot but is easy to counter in the next round). However, the feedback to those rule adjustments has been pretty mixed.

Keep in mind that Deathscyther's major counter (Valkyrie) also has huge issues with wear and Bursting, so double-valued Bursts increase both the potential reward and the risk. Since Attack is risky to begin with, I can definitely understand why more people would stick with their Deathscyther mirror matches in hope of out-launching their opponent.

I'm also aware of this, but there's no perfect solution :') We tried to counter-balance this by making it so only the loser could switch, giving them a clear opening against easily-countered combos like Deathscyther ones (and applying pressure to not use such easily countered combos), but some people said that this was unfair or punishing to winners.

We're doing our best to adjust the game in ways that make it more competitive to play, in ways that alter the rules from the Takara-Tomy originals far more than just banning parts. So we're definitely not against changing the rules.

I'd really like it if the players who would like to see Deathscyther banned could do some tests to see what exactly the game could look like in that situation. I'll do some as well.

At this point I feel like a Limited-eque complete revamp of the game balance is necessary, at least as an interim measure until Takara or Hasbro release more effective Attack types.

I would propose banning Deathscyther, Dark Deathscyther, Odin, and probably Neptune and Wyvern (All Takara, Hasbro variants seem to be less powerful so far) in order to largely eliminate "safe" combos with an uncomfortably powerful mix of Defense and Stamina. I would actually have suggested banning Takara Valkyrie as well to completely stomp out the last major pay-to-win offender, but it appears that Hasbro's Valtryek outclasses Takara's version, or is at least comparable enough to be interchangeable (allowing Bladers to avoid obsessing over the condition of the only viable Attack type around).

This leaves us with Unicorn and Chaos for Stamina, probably Kaiser Kerbeus and/or Nepstrius or other Hasbro versions for Defense, and Valtryek (possibly ban it and Valkyrie to allow O2 and Xcalibur to see more use) for Attack. This gives us a pretty clear type triangle, with Stamina Bursting easily, Defense having poor Stamina, and Attack not being both resisted and OSed by everything. With the nerfs to Stamina and Defense, Zephyr and Trans Attack may prove troublesome, though. Thoughts?

---

Threads and combos!

Spoiler (Click to View)

[LTD] MF Jade Horogium 85RSF
[LTD] RB / RSF Attack
[LTD] Ronin Genbull (Crystal Up) 85RF
MF-H Phantom (Attack) Cancer 85RB
MSF-H Wyvang Ifraid GB145RF {Alternative to Wyvang^2 with more Upper Attack}
MSF-H Genbull Genbull 85RSF {Improved version of the above Phantom combo}
Balro Begirados 100RF {LTAC with both Upper Smash and regular Smash}
[LTD] MF-H Lightning L-Drago 85RB {more controllable Lightning LTAC}
[LTD] Burn Orion 105SF {Destabilizer}

Well, banning it is one easy solution but I am also not convinced about the state of the metagame after that is done. So, there might be other solutions in the same vein as doubling how much Bursts are worth that we have not explored yet.

We've explored this and tried it as part of the experimental format, but the reaction was pretty negative all-around. The whole idea behind deck format was to reduce the homogeneity of combos being used, but because a whole tournament ran this way would be unviable its impact is limited only to the finals.

Stuff like 2-point wins and loser switching were gameplay elements designed to incentivize skill-based attack play and apply pressure against using "safe" stamina combos like Deathscyther (which can outspin a lot but is easy to counter in the next round). However, the feedback to those rule adjustments has been pretty mixed.

Oh I know, I read the feedback too. Letting my imagination run wild, I even went as far as thinking that all Stamina types should be launched with regular launchers (no Long Winder either). There are some benefits to launching weakly sometimes, but it sounds like something that could be given a chance. And if this is too far-fetched or bad, then it is just an example of how we can think outside the box.


Silva, I hope that the reason you edited the last part out of your post is because you know that it is not true... Clearly everybody's opinion will be taken into account and the fact that this topic continues to exist and gets discussed is proof that we want to know what everyone has to say. You say you are against banning Deathscyther, which actually makes you sort of on the same side as some people who would prefer not to keep banning things, and on the opposite side, other Members are extremely supportive of its ban instead. Not even within the Committee are opinions all the same.

I would propose banning Deathscyther, Dark Deathscyther, Odin, and probably Neptune and Wyvern (All Takara, Hasbro variants seem to be less powerful so far) in order to largely eliminate "safe" combos with an uncomfortably powerful mix of Defense and Stamina. I would actually have suggested banning Takara Valkyrie as well to completely stomp out the last major pay-to-win offender, but it appears that Hasbro's Valtryek outclasses Takara's version, or is at least comparable enough to be interchangeable (allowing Bladers to avoid obsessing over the condition of the only viable Attack type around).

This leaves us with Unicorn and Chaos for Stamina, probably Kaiser Kerbeus and/or Nepstrius or other Hasbro versions for Defense, and Valtryek (possibly ban it and Valkyrie to allow O2 and Xcalibur to see more use) for Attack. This gives us a pretty clear type triangle, with Stamina Bursting easily, Defense having poor Stamina, and Attack not being both resisted and OSed by everything. With the nerfs to Stamina and Defense, Zephyr and Trans Attack may prove troublesome, though. Thoughts?

My thought is that at this point, you should probably play MFB or another game instead. Banning every single competitive part so that we're looking for the best parts among the scraps isn't really a solution.

I feel like you guys are ignoring what's going to happen if you ban Deathscyther. Right now, it seems as if everyone has forgotten that Valkyrie exists, which, as previously mentioned (and probably ignored) hard counters Deathscyther. Banning Deathscyther closes the doors to a lot of viable combos and leaves you with what will most likely be a two combo format (D2 and Odin) which is not very fun in the slightest.

I used a Deathscyther combo at the BeyDays event I attended. Can confirm, Deathscyther is OP. (Source: I won the Burst format)

Sorry, but, this tournament was months ago, was it not? I feel like the meta has changed a bit since then. Also, a lot of the combos used at that tournament didn't really seem that competitive in the first place. No one used Valkyrie against you, except for the first round, which you lost.

What vulnerabilities does Deathscyther have that Dark Deathscyther and Odin don't have? The teeth wear out but a new Deathscyther is definitely better than either of those two other parts in practically every way. I would like you both to explain what currently beats Deathscyther, and how the meta without Deathscyther would be worse.

As mentioned, Deathscyther loses to Valkyrie pretty badly. Did you forget that it exists? That's what it seems like. I feel like I'm just echoing what Brad said because you clearly side stepped it and continued to press your same points into the ground, despite being proven otherwise.

I'm wholeheartedly against Deathscyther being banned, but I guess I'm not a prominent enough member so my opinion clearly doesn't matter. It's the "Mortals" versus the "Corrupt Committee" I guess.

F230 had counters did it not? I guess we all just forgot about those when we banned it. What combos is it closing the door to? Have you not looked at his format, its literally Deathscyther and some Dark Deathscyther. I'm not sure what your referring to that would be irrelevant in the current format if Deathscyther got banned, because attack isn't really topping.

Don't you think thats a problem when a few months ago the same combination swept an event and it is still dominating events? What different "counters" have arisen since then? The meta is still focused around Deathscyther, so I'm not sure how much it has changed which is the problem here.

Then why is Deathscyther still dominating despite Valkyrie being this flawless counter? Valkyrie has its own issues, and I've witnessed it lose against Deathscyther multiple times. I personally have lost to a fresh Deathscyther multiple times with a Valkyrie, no one is flawless but the fact that I've attempted using Valkyrie on multiple occasions now and not once has worked is an issue. Also I did not side step the issue, Brad didn't mention Valkyrie till after my latest post in this thread.

Also considering both Kai-V and Bey Brad have agreed with some of my points I don't think they've been proven wrong. Both of them have admitted on multiple occasions that Deathscyther is an issue. What it seems the problem is the resolution after Deathscyther gets banned, banning a part is to make the game greater and they want to make sure that it doesn't turn worse off then it already is (although I don't believe it could get worse, we definitely think differently on this subject)

Well, banning it is one easy solution but I am also not convinced about the state of the metagame after that is done. So, there might be other solutions in the same vein as doubling how much Bursts are worth that we have not explored yet.

We've explored this and tried it as part of the experimental format, but the reaction was pretty negative all-around. The whole idea behind deck format was to reduce the homogeneity of combos being used, but because a whole tournament ran this way would be unviable its impact is limited only to the finals.

@[Thunder Dome], what impact did you think that the experimental format had on combo selection, particularly in the finals? I was re-reading your post on it and you mentioned that not many people actually switched during the finals, which surprised me.

Stuff like 2-point wins and loser switching were gameplay elements designed to incentivize skill-based attack play and apply pressure against using "safe" stamina combos like Deathscyther (which can outspin a lot but is easy to counter in the next round). However, the feedback to those rule adjustments has been pretty mixed.

The main problem with this for me was the fear of using a combination like Valkyrie and getting bursted my self. In a format where a burst is 2 points it felt really risky considering my previous encounters with the Deathscyther match up. It would be interesting if we had Valtyrek, but it's not really easy to pick up the Hasbro beyblades if you live in the USA like many bladers and my self do.

What's funny about this whole discussion is that in time period between Deathscyther's release and Odin's release, there weren't really any complaints about Deathscyther's dominance because it was easily countered by Valkyrie. The Valkyrie > Wyvern > Deathscyther triangle kept things in check. Of course, this is its own kind of homogeneity and comes with its own issues. But it also makes me think that Deathscyther itself isn't the real problem.

To be fair back at that point I felt that the main region playing Beyblade Burst was Canada (and there might've been a few UK tournaments). Do you feel the meta and strategies weren't developed enough back then, or was Valkyrie just so strong because everyone had access to fresh ones?

However, the arrival of Dark Deathscyther and now unbanning of Odin both put pressure against players selecting Valkyrie, so Deathscyther becomes the safest choice (since Valkyrie has poor odds against either of these). Rather than take the risk of trying to counter Deathscyther and ending up against D2 or Odin, most players will opt for the safe route and take Deathscyther.

When we made the decision to ban Odin, we did it after quite a bit of discussion and tests being posted by numerous players. There haven't been any tests posted in this thread yet and no counter-argument to the idea that Odin and Dark Deathscyther will simply move up to fill Deathscyther's slot in the metagame.

We want to solve this problem as much as you do, but we at least need evidence that it won't just create more problems. I don't think it's irresponsible of us to "wait," in that case.

Stormscorpio1 and I (and some others) at recent events were testing before the event Odin and Dark Deathscyther didn't seem to hard to burst, maybe we were doing something wrong or just have bad Odins and Dark Deathscythers, but honestly they didn't seem any more challenging to Burst than a Deathscyther would be (honestly they seemed easier to Burst, because fresh Deathscyther's generally seem to burst whatever I throw on).

Honestly is Deathscyther dominating every event not enough? I remember when bringing up that Odin was getting destroyed in everyones tests (even the people supporting the banning of Odin!), everyone was acting like tests don't mean much and I should look towards tournament results. I brought up 5 (now 6) tournaments in the last month where Deathscyther has dominated.

You made a thread to discuss it, so I'm here to discuss it. If the only reply that will make you happy is "OK, we'll ban it!" then it's not going to be much of a discussion.

I'm sorry if I've come off as rude. I understand where you are coming from, you don't want this game to be worse and we have to take that into consideration when wanting to ban a part. If you couldn't tell I feel really strongly towards this topic!

Thanks for understanding Trust us, nothing makes us happier than to see multi-page discussions of competitive Beyblade on the site, so know that we're happy to have the conversation regardless of the outcome haha

To be fair back at that point I felt that the main region playing Beyblade Burst was Canada (and there might've been a few UK tournaments). Do you feel the meta and strategies weren't developed enough back then, or was Valkyrie just so strong because everyone had access to fresh ones?

Good question! I think it's just because Valkyrie is a legitimately well-shaped part. It's easy to lose to self-bursting even with a mint Valkyrie, so I don't know that that's the only issue. The major issue is that it's just not a part that inspires a ton of confidence.

Valkyrie does have its own issues, but its efficacy against Deathscyther is not really one of them. The bigger problem is that it's not really effective against anything else — that combined with the durability issues disincentives playing it.

Regarding Valtryek, I can tell you I did a few mock rounds of VKR Vs. mint DHD and VKR was wrecking it. I'll do a testing thread soon. I just wish we had Hasbro Xtreme.

I feel like you guys are ignoring what's going to happen if you ban Deathscyther. Right now, it seems as if everyone has forgotten that Valkyrie exists, which, as previously mentioned (and probably ignored) hard counters Deathscyther. Banning Deathscyther closes the doors to a lot of viable combos and leaves you with what will most likely be a two combo format (D2 and Odin) which is not very fun in the slightest.

I used a Deathscyther combo at the BeyDays event I attended. Can confirm, Deathscyther is OP. (Source: I won the Burst format)

Sorry, but, this tournament was months ago, was it not? I feel like the meta has changed a bit since then. Also, a lot of the combos used at that tournament didn't really seem that competitive in the first place. No one used Valkyrie against you, except for the first round, which you lost.

What vulnerabilities does Deathscyther have that Dark Deathscyther and Odin don't have? The teeth wear out but a new Deathscyther is definitely better than either of those two other parts in practically every way. I would like you both to explain what currently beats Deathscyther, and how the meta without Deathscyther would be worse.

As mentioned, Deathscyther loses to Valkyrie pretty badly. Did you forget that it exists? That's what it seems like. I feel like I'm just echoing what Brad said because you clearly side stepped it and continued to press your same points into the ground, despite being proven otherwise.

I'm wholeheartedly against Deathscyther being banned, but I guess I'm not a prominent enough member so my opinion clearly doesn't matter. It's the "Mortals" versus the "Corrupt Committee" I guess.

F230 had counters did it not? I guess we all just forgot about those when we banned it. What combos is it closing the door to? Have you not looked at his format, its literally Deathscyther and some Dark Deathscyther. I'm not sure what your referring to that would be irrelevant in the current format if Deathscyther got banned, because attack isn't really topping.

Don't you think thats a problem when a few months ago the same combination swept an event and it is still dominating events? What different "counters" have arisen since then? The meta is still focused around Deathscyther, so I'm not sure how much it has changed which is the problem here.

Then why is Deathscyther still dominating despite Valkyrie being this flawless counter? Valkyrie has its own issues, and I've witnessed it lose against Deathscyther multiple times. I personally have lost to a fresh Deathscyther multiple times with a Valkyrie, no one is flawless but the fact that I've attempted using Valkyrie on multiple occasions now and not once has worked is an issue. Also I did not side step the issue, Brad didn't mention Valkyrie till after my latest post in this thread.

Also considering both Kai-V and Bey Brad have agreed with some of my points I don't think they've been proven wrong. Both of them have admitted on multiple occasions that Deathscyther is an issue. What it seems the problem is the resolution after Deathscyther gets banned, banning a part is to make the game greater and they want to make sure that it doesn't turn worse off then it already is (although I don't believe it could get worse, we definitely think differently on this subject)

Because people don't think Valkyrie is as safe as an option. Admittedly, Valkyrie does have issues similar to Deathscyther, on an even more intense scale, but the option is there, and more often than not, people aren't really taking it. I'm inclined to believe that it's more of a mentality and format issue - people aren't willing to take risks as often.

I do, however, apologize for slighting against you like that. It wasn't really mature and I jumped to conclusions before fully reading the thread. Once again, my apologies.

I believe the game could be worse if Deathsycther gets banned, (that being a two combo format) but I understand your stance on the situation.

---

https://worldbeyblade.org/Thread-Beyblad...pid1530998

PLEASE READ MY STORY PLEASE ^^^^^^^^^^^^^

I would propose banning Deathscyther, Dark Deathscyther, Odin, and probably Neptune and Wyvern (All Takara, Hasbro variants seem to be less powerful so far) in order to largely eliminate "safe" combos with an uncomfortably powerful mix of Defense and Stamina. I would actually have suggested banning Takara Valkyrie as well to completely stomp out the last major pay-to-win offender, but it appears that Hasbro's Valtryek outclasses Takara's version, or is at least comparable enough to be interchangeable (allowing Bladers to avoid obsessing over the condition of the only viable Attack type around).

This leaves us with Unicorn and Chaos for Stamina, probably Kaiser Kerbeus and/or Nepstrius or other Hasbro versions for Defense, and Valtryek (possibly ban it and Valkyrie to allow O2 and Xcalibur to see more use) for Attack. This gives us a pretty clear type triangle, with Stamina Bursting easily, Defense having poor Stamina, and Attack not being both resisted and OSed by everything. With the nerfs to Stamina and Defense, Zephyr and Trans Attack may prove troublesome, though. Thoughts?

My thought is that at this point, you should probably play MFB or another game instead. Banning every single competitive part so that we're looking for the best parts among the scraps isn't really a solution.

With Attack being on the weak side, a whole array of strong Defense/Stamina Layers available, and players being generally hesitant to use Attack at all, even when they are being handed an opportunity to use it ideally, things are pretty messy. The major problems that we have, had, or could have are Deathscyther, Odin, and D2. With all three unbanned, mint Deathscyther is more or less king, with the threat of Odin or D2 further reducing people's willingness to play Attack. Ban Deathscyther and you're left with just Odin and D2 without reliable counters (aside from Chaos stallers, which are still risky). Leave Odin banned and nothing changes. Ban D2 and Odin and we go back to the Valkyrie/Wyvern/Deathscyther meta, which is all well and good except that it doesn't solve the problem of Deathscyther's wear issues (which I'm hoping Hasbro will fix), or the existing psychology of "stick with Deathscyther spam, Attack is too risky".

It's clear that something needs to be done, but it seems to me that there may not be an easy answer. Banning one thing won't make all of Burst's issues fix themselves overnight, which is why yes, I will be sticking to MFB for the foreseeable future

---

Threads and combos!

Spoiler (Click to View)

[LTD] MF Jade Horogium 85RSF
[LTD] RB / RSF Attack
[LTD] Ronin Genbull (Crystal Up) 85RF
MF-H Phantom (Attack) Cancer 85RB
MSF-H Wyvang Ifraid GB145RF {Alternative to Wyvang^2 with more Upper Attack}
MSF-H Genbull Genbull 85RSF {Improved version of the above Phantom combo}
Balro Begirados 100RF {LTAC with both Upper Smash and regular Smash}
[LTD] MF-H Lightning L-Drago 85RB {more controllable Lightning LTAC}
[LTD] Burn Orion 105SF {Destabilizer}

which is all well and good except that it doesn't solve the problem of Deathscyther's wear issues (which I'm hoping Hasbro will fix)

Well, we can be confident they'll fix that much. Whether it will come with a new problem entirely is unknown as of now haha

Um... Is this whole issue not completely solved by the Deck Format?

[Too many good posts to quote but] if Valkyrie has been on the decline since the unbanning of Odin, then this is a clear example of the double-blind selection problem. Perhaps it's time we seriously considered having full deck-format tournaments?

Yeah, logistics. But outside the box, consider allowing hosts to run two simultaneous (but separate) tournaments at a single event. If the are 14 or more players, give hosts the option of dividing the entire field into two groups. Play deck format from beginning to end. More than 21 players? Three groups! Problem solved...?

---

Um... Is this whole issue not completely solved by the Deck Format?

IMO it totally is (and that was the point), but we can't scale this format to a full tournament so it won't solve the issue for everyone. However, for competitive players who frequently enter the top 4 — it should make a world of difference.

The issue is not just that it takes too long, but that it's totally confusing and punishing to players under an intermediate skill level.

So you're worried that the way in which it turns the event's external metagame into a series of mindgames integral to gameplay is so far from standard 1v1 play that many of the younger, less hardcore or simply less well informed entrants would be completely out out of their depth?

If so, I don't dissagree but would like to point out that the deck system, albeit not quite as you've designed it, has been suggested by Hasbro quite consistently since the plastic era. It is not featured in the show due to partnership with one's bey being a strong theme and it was never all that well put forward so I really don't know if people are all that aware of it but the general idea of 3beys v 3beys, winner stays on and loser attempts to counter is nothing new.

Perhaps introducing team play would be a way to bridge the gap between the formats as it's well documented in the anime so should be better recieved and understood but is otherwise just the deck format with a person attached to each bey.
Small (straight to top 4) team tournaments would only require 12 people.

I'm not really worried, I've just already seen how less experienced players react in these tournaments. Many of them don't have three Beyblades, let alone three competitive combos. And they don't know when to switch and how parts interact with each other. The added elements that make the format more fun for experienced players make it a slog for others.

Team format is obviously the least accessible format to play of them all.

And if I remember correctly, it was a new Deathscyther, was it not?

This was Wizard's first Burst tournament, he used a new Deathscyther Heavy Defense all day and swept.

Not completely new, but also not used enough that the teeth really started to wear down. So basically new.

Banning D D2 and O will literally do no good, it will make it worse... Wyvern and Neptune were very dominant in my side event. And it was even worse because it was dragged out stamina battles instead of some burst finishes happening and making it "exciting". Sure valk and V2 were used more than now, but still nowhere near enough to make wyvern and Neptune not be the top players of the event.

Side note: Neptune was more popular cuz it resists Xcal a lot better than wyvern.

Just saying, once Hasbro beys are legal Roktavor and Spryzen S2 will get a bit of... "Spotlight" by a bit I mean a lot, they are powerful enough to revive attack, they beat Odin and deathscyther like nothing, though D2 is still pretty hard to beat with them.

While I do think Deathscyther: The Powerhouse is a problem right now, I'm not sure I'm convinced that it needs to be banned immediately. At the most recent tournament in Toronto, D2 was used just as much if not more, and when Deathscyther goes, I can't see a scenario where D2 doesn't simply replace it with similar problems.

We haven't seen the impact of Hasbro Beys on Burst Format yet, and there are some promising test results forthcoming that have the potential to shake up the metagame. I'm not opposed to banning Deathscyther because it's so hard to obtain and wears out easily, but I guess I'd personally prefer to see how things go for a little while longer.

The game doesn't feel... not fun to me right now, like it did when Odin was wrecking (at least in my local community). We're still seeing Deathscyther Burst in cool ways at tournaments. People are using Valkyrie and V2 and matches still feel exciting.

While Deathscyther is indeed a powerful part, I don't think it is as gamebreaking as some people here and Takara-Tomy (I think? whoever runs the organized play in Japan) seem to believe.

Kei described Deathscyther best when he said it was "perfectly flawed" - it has great Stamina but suffers the tradeoff of being pretty easy to Burst and KO.

oh boy here comes the mindless ko/burst split plug brace urselves

People say that mint DS is too hard to Burst, but mint Valkyrie Bursts it consistently on a stationary setup. "But Valkyrie wears down and 'pay to win is the only way to win'." Deathscyther wears down at the same rate as Valkyrie, but you don't see anyone complaining about getting Bursted by a mint Valkyrie which is just as easy/difficult to replace.

People keep treating Valkyrie like it's the only competitive Attack Layer. There are plenty of other non-Valkyrie counters that can beat Deathscyther by KO (and occasionally Burst). Neither V2 nor Xcalibur has the wear issues that Valkyrie does, and V2's breakage problems were addressed. While neither of these Wheels do as well on stationary setups as Valkyrie does, you can use them on a more mobile setup like XHX or V2K/GX (you can use Accel or Zephyr if you're uncomfortable with Xtreme). Nearly all of my tournament experiences with Deathscyther involve it losing by Burst, even to stuff like Odin Heavy Blow, Odin Heavy Defense, and V2 Knuckle Xtreme (a combo designed to KO things).

Mint Valkyrie Burst Attack is also able to win against pretty much anything stationary with about the same consistency as mint Deathscyther Stamina (the DS Bursts and Valk bursts/gets OSed ratios are about the same from what I can tell), while also suffering the same wear issues. With Bursts being worth 2 points I'm honestly surprised that Valkyrie Heavy/Gravity/Knuckle/Armed Yielding/Revolve/Defense/whatever isn't seeing a lot more use because that's how a burst happens, and it also requires less skill than using KO Attack.

This is why I still think that Bursts should only be worth 1 point, and KOs worth 2. Losing Stamina battles to random Bursts isn't fun, and I've heard from a few sources that the random KOs that supposedly happened left and right in the Toronto event weren't as frequent as they were made out to be. Not only will having KOs worth 2 points incentivize KO Attack, but so will making Bursts only 1 point because you run the same risk for a Self-Burst that you would a Self-KO. As it stands, pretty much the only thing stopping KO Attack from ripping through the meta is the user's lack of skill/confidence (which has always been the case with Attack... but come on, the best Defense combos are still only using plastic tips). That was pretty much the case at AN, and honestly not much has changed since then (I think like Yielding and Trans are the only "good" parts released since then?).

Um this reply kinda went off on a tangent so I'll wrap it up: It's a neigh from me. There are non-pay-to-win options to beat Deathscyther, and from what most people are saying it's the only thing keeping D2 in check so removing it would probably not be good for the meta. I'm looking forward to reading Mitsu's post where he went full-on wombat mode and recorded every match at the tournament though.

Keep in mind though, that historically, my experiences and thoughts with Burst have been basically the opposite of what everyone else thinks, so I don't know how valuable my input is here anymore lol. I don't see D2 as the powerhouse that everyone else does. I think Armed is viable. I think that there are competitive Attack Layers that aren't Valkyrie. I got Neptune Revolve to beat D2 Orbit (admittedly, it was 3-2). I disagree about Deathscyther being difficult to Burst. I think Neptune is viable. I can get DSA to outspin OHD pretty consistently. I think the Long Winder is stronger than the String Launcher. I think that there are two different categories of Attack and Defense in Burst. And as weird and pretentious as it sounds, through either luck or some crazy confirmation-bias-type reason, I feel like I "bend the game to my rules" whenever I play it. For me, the contradictory results I get from testing carry over to the tournaments.

I think the main problem with bursting is that it has a high priority. Personally, if someone spins out or rings out at the same time as a burst it should count as a draw. That way, self destructs via bursting won't be that big of an issue. That being said, bursting should stay 2 points and KO's nil because KO's sound like bull to me.

I feel pretty strongly that banning Deathscyther wouldn't make any improvements at all to the metagame. As Brad said you'd be targeting the symptom of the problem not the actual problem. Also as others have said D2 and Odin don't have any great weaknesses to exploit unlike Deathscyther. And for the people who say that Valkyrie has burst issues so what? That's not gonna change and it doesn't make it any less viable of a counter to Deathscyther.

While many points have already been voiced, and I am just going to go ahead and state mine, so excuse me if some points have already been spoken.

I think banning DeathScyther and Dark DeathScyther would be best for the meta. DeathScyther was banned for TAKARA-TOMY, as it was extremely prominent in their tournaments, but beside that, they do not want DeathScyther being produced either. Banning DeathScyther would mean that they don't want it to be used, but with the original Starter being out of print, along with Random Booster Volume 2 in which there are two possible DeathScythers you can obtain, this will be affecting the overseas communities, such as us. I do not see them rereleasing a banned part (seen in the questionnaire they released, where RBV2 was not an option), so over time it'll become more scarce (which it already is starting to become), and those who have mint DeathScythers will be at a greater advantage.

Dark DeathScyther should also be banned, as it is clearly dominating in many regions. Dark DeathScyther has good stamina, and while it may not be the best, it is able to still win by destabilizing the opponent. While this isn't such a problem since Destabilizers are generally not overpowered, Dark DeathScyther's defense makes it even more of a menace. You are able to launch Dark DeathScyther at full power and still have amazing defense (due to its extremely round shape), and even if there are counters to Dark DeathScyther (and DeathScyther), the other options are not as consistent as Valkryie; a layer which is great for attack, but wears rapidly. While I know I am playing the 'Valkryie has bad teeth' card, I have to use it since that is such a discouraging consequence if you want to have a better chance at beating a prominent combo.

Adding to the first point I made about DeathScyther being over used, except for Dark DeathScyther being the real blunt of it this time; Odin was banned as it was extremely versitile, being able to outspin DeathScyther (most likely because of destabilizing) and having great Defense when used as Odin Heavy Defense. It was banned because of this, but Dark DeathScyther is almost the same issue; except I would even consider it better. While the Stamina is not as good as DeathScyther, it is still able to defeat it occasionally by destabilizing, and along with its great teeth and round shape, it can be launched at full launch power and still have great Defense (as said before), unlike Odin. Because of this, it is even more of what Odin was, but it seems like it was never seen as such before.

---

૮(•ᴥ•)ა

I think the argument for banning it that resonates with me most is that it's prone to wear + increasingly difficult to find. Were it not for these issues, I would say it's fine since it has such an obvious counter in Valkyrie/Valtryek. We could revisit the ban once Doomscizor comes out, if it serves a comparable role.

However, I don't think we should ban more than one part at a time; it's worth seeing how things are without Deathscyther but with Odin and D2, and what kinds of strategize rise up (or fail) to address them. I also worry that getting rid of Deathscyther will mean the end of attack entirely.

Thanks to everyone who contributed to the conversation so far. @[Mitsu] You said you were going to post more from your tournament, yeah?

Not sure how many of you ended up seeing this: https://worldbeyblade.org/Thread-Removin...m-the-game

I have pretty mixed feelings on Deathscyther. While I believe it can be used for success and becomes versatile when used right, it is not overly consistent. On the other hand, however, it just really doesn't hurt to ban it either. As I had mentioned in the thread above, options like Chaos, Unicorn and possibly even Holy Horusood become viable. But yes, I would definitely be interested in seeing if Doomscizor holds a candle up to its Japanese counterpart.