(Oct. 04, 2021  10:54 PM)Lucha Burst Wrote:

Spoiler (Click to View)

I don't believe that I've posted my thoughts yet, so allow me to do that, now these are my own opinions feel free to dispute them if you'd like but in my opinion No, Two versions of a driver Should not be allowed in the same deck.

Why?
Imagine for a moment that destroy ruled the meta and was unbeatable, Imagine you had three different combos
Guilty Bahamut Nexus Metal Destroy -/+2
Savior Ragnarok Over Destroy' -/+0
Dynamite Belial Giga Destroy -/+3

There all Destroy, they all are the same driver but 2 have different springs/cap. the same gimmicks... the same amount of power in the meta. back to the Real world with Drift, Bearing ETC. when you have OP parts like Drift and bearing and Zone'+Z, and the n all of a suddenly you have the ability to have 2 Drifts in a Deck and s bearings the meta is now dominated by 2 drivers who have little weakness, With the problem of Draws already a Huge problem in the meta how do you think it would go if everyone was using Metal drift on the bahamut core or everyone spamming Bearing' you get battles that go something like this

Vanish bahamut over Metal Drift -/+0 vs Roar bahamut Over Metal Drift -/+ 0

It gets repetitive really fast and the meta turns into "who has 24 hours to waste" or "who has the better launcher so they can get three more rotations. The meta would be dominated by metal drift on the bahamut core, Regular drift on a nother combo and bearing' to round out the List.  Now if we could only have one of these there would be more versatility you'd have to pick, metal drift or drift, Bearing would disappear over bearing' I'd assume and so on and so forth creating a more balanced meta. we've seen the coming and going of many drivers But with the ability to have 2 of an OP driver I doubt we'd have much of that for a while because drivers that could beat Drift or Bearing usually don't have a duplicate so theres only one in a deck meaning that the meta as it stands would remain unchanged for a while with certain drivers ruling as tyrants, with that I sign off this rant that most likely didnt make much sense with "If left spins didn't exist this wouldnt be a problem"

---

Spoiler (Click to View)

 with that said It might not even be a problem, Because in all honesty I see potential in ALL might in the meta, so who knows we will have to wait and see how things shake down

(Oct. 04, 2021  11:00 PM)Hollowmind8 Wrote:

(Oct. 04, 2021  10:54 PM)Lucha Burst Wrote:

Spoiler (Click to View)

I don't believe that I've posted my thoughts yet, so allow me to do that, now these are my own opinions feel free to dispute them if you'd like but in my opinion No, Two versions of a driver Should not be allowed in the same deck.

Why?
Imagine for a moment that destroy ruled the meta and was unbeatable, Imagine you had three different combos
Guilty Bahamut Nexus Metal Destroy -/+2
Savior Ragnarok Over Destroy' -/+0
Dynamite Belial Giga Destroy -/+3

There all Destroy, they all are the same driver but 2 have different springs/cap. the same gimmicks... the same amount of power in the meta. back to the Real world with Drift, Bearing ETC. when you have OP parts like Drift and bearing and Zone'+Z, and the n all of a suddenly you have the ability to have 2 Drifts in a Deck and s bearings the meta is now dominated by 2 drivers who have little weakness, With the problem of Draws already a Huge problem in the meta how do you think it would go if everyone was using Metal drift on the bahamut core or everyone spamming Bearing' you get battles that go something like this

Vanish bahamut over Metal Drift -/+0 vs Roar bahamut Over Metal Drift -/+ 0

It gets repetitive really fast and the meta turns into "who has 24 hours to waste" or "who has the better launcher so they can get three more rotations. The meta would be dominated by metal drift on the bahamut core, Regular drift on a nother combo and bearing' to round out the List.  Now if we could only have one of these there would be more versatility you'd have to pick, metal drift or drift, Bearing would disappear over bearing' I'd assume and so on and so forth creating a more balanced meta. we've seen the coming and going of many drivers But with the ability to have 2 of an OP driver I doubt we'd have much of that for a while because drivers that could beat Drift or Bearing usually don't have a duplicate so theres only one in a deck meaning that the meta as it stands would remain unchanged for a while with certain drivers ruling as tyrants, with that I sign off this rant that most likely didnt make much sense with "If left spins didn't exist this wouldnt be a problem"

---

Spoiler (Click to View)

 with that said It might not even be a problem, Because in all honesty I see potential in ALL might in the meta, so who knows we will have to wait and see how things shake down

I guess we'll have to work into counters if this does happen. Get ready for the war loads beygun.
In all seriousness, I doubt it will get banned at first, maybe it gets banned if there's no counters for it.

(Oct. 04, 2021  5:09 PM)TheRogueBlader Wrote: Maybe for people who can’t control drift. If they can it has insane stamina, equal to Xtend+ I would say, and yes I own the driver before you say I don’t. Yeah? Ok? Bearings easier to knock around. How does that prove your point? That just proves my point that drift is also OP cause of its high defense. 

(Oct. 04, 2021  5:40 PM)BuilderROB Wrote:

(Oct. 04, 2021  2:58 PM)MagikHorse Wrote: Is it really too OP to have two Drifts? Drift can be outspun easily in same spin, and Bearing is easier to knock around with things like Guilty and other Attack types.

Yes, actually, because 1. You can have a drift for each spin direction, and 2. If you’re competitive enough, drift can have decent enough same spin. Not super relatable same spin, but if you had to, it’s possible to make it work well enough to OS some stuff.

(Oct. 05, 2021  5:57 PM)MagikHorse Wrote: TheRogueBladerMaybe for people who can’t control drift. If they can it has insane stamina, equal to Xtend+ I would say, and yes I own the driver before you say I don’t. Yeah? Ok? Bearings easier to knock around. How does that prove your point? That just proves my point that drift is also OP cause of its high defense.
The issue is this "high defense" is also what usually causes Drift to lose Stamina, and sometimes that backfires if it hooks onto the ridge and throws itself out of the stadium. As someone who has legitimately won a Drift Vs. Bearing mirror match as the Drift user, I can definitely agree that it can be scary... but once again, you can build around facing it and exploiting its weaknesses too. I won because my opponent on Bearing couldn't knock me around enough to drain my spin, but it was mostly because they never even tried to do it in the first place. They let me have it on a silver platter because they refused to exploit my combo's flaws, and I had enough launching skill to avoid besting myself.

Drift is, in essence, a skill check. If you can beat Drift somewhat consistently, then you are a top-tier opponent and not someone to underestimate in the arena. If you struggle, or have to resort to praying for lucky LAD wins in opposite spin to try and beat it, you need to practice more or find a better strategy. Strong parts aren't necessarily bad parts or broken parts. If anything they let lesser skilled players have a chance in some matchups. Someday people will see that, and realize that instead of making excuses they should be working on making counterplay instead.

(Oct. 05, 2021  7:36 PM)CrisisCrusher07 Wrote: I keep seeing a lot of posts about bladers basically needing to get good. The point in this suggestion is that you can make a deck with 2 of essentially the same driver. This hasn’t really been an issue before. However, none of the drivers that have had these sorts of upgraded versions have really been competitive drivers in the standard format. Now we have 2 drivers coming out that are currently played in almost every deck in the winning combination threads deck lists. Yes I get there are ways of beating drift and bearing. But the point is that these drivers are so strong in specific areas. Bearing is really good in same spin match ups when put against a lot of the other top tier drivers such as Drift, Mobius, Never, Etc.. and Drift is the best driver for opposite spin LAD match ups where the only counter to it in opposite spin is basically an opposite spin drift match up. In witch case you’re staring at slow motion videos for 20 minutes to determine points. That is already something the WBO staff want to be able to minimize. Not to mention the amount of LAD match ups that will happen in Swiss adding more time. Now let me give you a deck example and how it will be played…

Deck:
Guilty Longinus Karma xtreme’/Metal xtreme-2
Dynamite Belial F gear Over Drift-6
Roar Buhamut Giga Metal Drift-0

Now you go into the match with this deck. All you have to to is use your Guilty combo and score that first point against your opponent. Let’s say that happens you get the KO and your opponent decides to not go for the rematch. You stick with your Guilty combo. They move to a more defensive left spin combo and get the win. Now points are at 1 all. You decide to not go for the rematch and they pick to stay on their left spin combo. Or maybe even they decide to go for their right spin combo. Well now that they have chosen, so long as that combo isn’t on a drift, you choose your drift combo that is an opposite spin. You now just barely tug the ripcord to your launcher and light launch against their combo that’s spinning in the opposite spin. Now the 2 beys start to spin equalize and once you get to that LAD your drift combo vastly out spins their combo, granting you your second point. Do you see where I’m going with this? Once you get the first point you will just constantly go back and forth in points until you hit 5 points first because you had gotten the first point. This is the problem I’m talking about. And the exact same thing can happen with bearing except you aim for the same spin match up over the opposite spin. The only things a burst or attack combos MIGHT have a chance to sway the points against either deck. However, when going against an attacker they are still pretty much forced to launch as hard as they can to try and KO you. But, you can always light launch your bey if it’s an opposite spin, which can cause a slow motion burst in the attacker and put the opponent even further behind.

These are the reasons why I strongly feel that allowing more than 1 version of a driver/part to be allowed in a deck shouldn’t be allowed. We play this game a lot differently than those in Japan. They use the 5G format that wouldn’t allow them to have this issue. When you order your deck of 5 beys you have no clue what each of your 5 beys will be going against. So having multiple parts in a 5G or maybe even a 3G deck probably isn’t that bad.

Anyway this kind of situation is what I have been talking about as to why I am concerned about the Standard format come the middle of the month.

Side note:
The only reason I am not worried about Classic or Limited is because they already have banned parts and will ban the parts of they are a problem. I do know the staff actively does not want to have to ban any parts for the standard format.

(Oct. 05, 2021  8:00 PM)TheRogueBlader Wrote:

(Oct. 05, 2021  7:36 PM)CrisisCrusher07 Wrote: I keep seeing a lot of posts about bladers basically needing to get good. The point in this suggestion is that you can make a deck with 2 of essentially the same driver. This hasn’t really been an issue before. However, none of the drivers that have had these sorts of upgraded versions have really been competitive drivers in the standard format. Now we have 2 drivers coming out that are currently played in almost every deck in the winning combination threads deck lists. Yes I get there are ways of beating drift and bearing. But the point is that these drivers are so strong in specific areas. Bearing is really good in same spin match ups when put against a lot of the other top tier drivers such as Drift, Mobius, Never, Etc.. and Drift is the best driver for opposite spin LAD match ups where the only counter to it in opposite spin is basically an opposite spin drift match up. In witch case you’re staring at slow motion videos for 20 minutes to determine points. That is already something the WBO staff want to be able to minimize. Not to mention the amount of LAD match ups that will happen in Swiss adding more time. Now let me give you a deck example and how it will be played…

Deck:
Guilty Longinus Karma xtreme’/Metal xtreme-2
Dynamite Belial F gear Over Drift-6
Roar Buhamut Giga Metal Drift-0

Now you go into the match with this deck. All you have to to is use your Guilty combo and score that first point against your opponent. Let’s say that happens you get the KO and your opponent decides to not go for the rematch. You stick with your Guilty combo. They move to a more defensive left spin combo and get the win. Now points are at 1 all. You decide to not go for the rematch and they pick to stay on their left spin combo. Or maybe even they decide to go for their right spin combo. Well now that they have chosen, so long as that combo isn’t on a drift, you choose your drift combo that is an opposite spin. You now just barely tug the ripcord to your launcher and light launch against their combo that’s spinning in the opposite spin. Now the 2 beys start to spin equalize and once you get to that LAD your drift combo vastly out spins their combo, granting you your second point. Do you see where I’m going with this? Once you get the first point you will just constantly go back and forth in points until you hit 5 points first because you had gotten the first point. This is the problem I’m talking about. And the exact same thing can happen with bearing except you aim for the same spin match up over the opposite spin. The only things a burst or attack combos MIGHT have a chance to sway the points against either deck. However, when going against an attacker they are still pretty much forced to launch as hard as they can to try and KO you. But, you can always light launch your bey if it’s an opposite spin, which can cause a slow motion burst in the attacker and put the opponent even further behind.

These are the reasons why I strongly feel that allowing more than 1 version of a driver/part to be allowed in a deck shouldn’t be allowed. We play this game a lot differently than those in Japan. They use the 5G format that wouldn’t allow them to have this issue. When you order your deck of 5 beys you have no clue what each of your 5 beys will be going against. So having multiple parts in a 5G or maybe even a 3G deck probably isn’t that bad.

Anyway this kind of situation is what I have been talking about as to why I am concerned about the Standard format come the middle of the month.

Side note:
The only reason I am not worried about Classic or Limited is because they already have banned parts and will ban the parts of they are a problem. I do know the staff actively does not want to have to ban any parts for the standard format.

I 1000% agree. Standard is standard, meaning everything should be allowed. But rules should be changed here and there and for this case, the rule where you could have 2 of the same drivers in a deck should not be allowed. I personallly think that KO’s should be 2 pts, but that’s just me and a whole other thing. In classic it won’t be a problem, but we should ban the 1 left bey. Limited will ban it if they see it as a problem obviously. 10000% agreed

(Oct. 05, 2021  8:41 PM)MagikHorse Wrote:

(Oct. 05, 2021  8:00 PM)TheRogueBlader Wrote: I 1000% agree. Standard is standard, meaning everything should be allowed. But rules should be changed here and there and for this case, the rule where you could have 2 of the same drivers in a deck should not be allowed. I personallly think that KO’s should be 2 pts, but that’s just me and a whole other thing. In classic it won’t be a problem, but we should ban the 1 left bey. Limited will ban it if they see it as a problem obviously. 10000% agreed

Drift is not an issue in Classic. Dragoon S and Dragoon F exist, but they are not shaped well and are inconsistent and bursty anyways (and therefore also not a real issue). It's enough to be usable, but my own attempt to use this strategy backfired horribly, and there's easy ways to outplay the Drift user with those layers.

(Oct. 05, 2021  9:16 PM)6Jupiter5 Wrote: Bearing’ seems pretty broken. While I don’t want to ban it just yet, I would place it on the watchlist of parts that could be banned.

(Oct. 05, 2021  8:46 PM)TheRogueBlader Wrote:

(Oct. 05, 2021  8:41 PM)MagikHorse Wrote: Drift is not an issue in Classic. Dragoon S and Dragoon F exist, but they are not shaped well and are inconsistent and bursty anyways (and therefore also not a real issue). It's enough to be usable, but my own attempt to use this strategy backfired horribly, and there's easy ways to outplay the Drift user with those layers.

Ever heard of a dash lad driver? I mean it was stupid of tt to do, but zone’+z exists. You know, a dash driver? With the best lad only 2nd to drift which will burst anyway and will never be used in same spin? Ultimate combo anyone?
(Sorry if I sound rude, I just tend to type like this when in a debate about something)

(Oct. 05, 2021  9:18 PM)Lucha Burst Wrote:

(Oct. 05, 2021  9:16 PM)6Jupiter5 Wrote: Bearing’ seems pretty broken. While I don’t want to ban it just yet, I would place it on the watchlist of parts that could be banned.

we have to see how it acts, the descriptions says "one step tighter" so it might just be bearing with a normal spring

(Oct. 05, 2021  9:29 PM)MagikHorse Wrote:

(Oct. 05, 2021  8:46 PM)TheRogueBlader Wrote: Ever heard of a dash lad driver? I mean it was stupid of tt to do, but zone’+z exists. You know, a dash driver? With the best lad only 2nd to drift which will burst anyway and will never be used in same spin? Ultimate combo anyone?
(Sorry if I sound rude, I just tend to type like this when in a debate about something)

Yes, acting like I've never heard of common meta parts is rather rude. The fact that I wasn't bringing it up is a sign that you're not considering something here, such as the format in general.

Classic is 99% right spin. You don't need maximum LAD in left spin, because right spin will be prepared to face right spin using drivers like Defense, Orbit, Revolve, Absorb(-S), and the occasional Liner(-S), or else running aggressive combos using a rubber flat like Xtreme' or Ultimate Reboot'. Only the last option really has any LAD at all to it at all. You can get away with Absorb(-S) easily on the Dragoons without having to resort to Drift, Zone'+Z, or Bearing (though only TT has the option to use it, HasBearing is already banned).

Zone'+Z has relatively poor Stamina, and will lose in the mirror to basically any other mid to high LAD driver unless it wins via Burst. The Dragoons themselves have terrible Attack, Defense, and Stamina, and through it terrible equalization potential. Even if you have the LAD advantage, Zone'-Z risks opponents outspinning it because there's not enough equalization going on, even against a right spin opponent. You may shore up your burst resistance, but it's not strictly better than the alternatives when that extra LAD is really sort of wasted and you make yourself easier to outspin on a layer that is not good at equalizing, and the same issues of being too poor at equalizing can happen on Bearing and Drift too as it is.

No, the Dragoons are not a threat for Classic. Spinning left is literally the only thing to their name that makes them usable, and their lack of consistency and poor equalization gives you several ways to beat them even on max LAD drivers in opposite spin. They are far from an ultimate combo.

(Oct. 05, 2021  9:29 PM)MagikHorse Wrote:

---

(Oct. 05, 2021  9:18 PM)Lucha Burst Wrote: we have to see how it acts, the descriptions says "one step tighter" so it might just be bearing with a normal spring

Their own video claimed it was the strength of an ordinary driver spring, so you'd be correct. This is also why the spring lock is yellow, not red.

(Oct. 05, 2021  9:35 PM)TheRogueBlader Wrote:

(Oct. 05, 2021  9:29 PM)MagikHorse Wrote: Yes, acting like I've never heard of common meta parts is rather rude. The fact that I wasn't bringing it up is a sign that you're not considering something here, such as the format in general.

Classic is 99% right spin. You don't need maximum LAD in left spin, because right spin will be prepared to face right spin using drivers like Defense, Orbit, Revolve, Absorb(-S), and the occasional Liner(-S), or else running aggressive combos using a rubber flat like Xtreme' or Ultimate Reboot'. Only the last option really has any LAD at all to it at all. You can get away with Absorb(-S) easily on the Dragoons without having to resort to Drift, Zone'+Z, or Bearing (though only TT has the option to use it, HasBearing is already banned).

Zone'+Z has relatively poor Stamina, and will lose in the mirror to basically any other mid to high LAD driver unless it wins via Burst. The Dragoons themselves have terrible Attack, Defense, and Stamina, and through it terrible equalization potential. Even if you have the LAD advantage, Zone'-Z risks opponents outspinning it because there's not enough equalization going on, even against a right spin opponent. You may shore up your burst resistance, but it's not strictly better than the alternatives when that extra LAD is really sort of wasted and you make yourself easier to outspin on a layer that is not good at equalizing, and the same issues of being too poor at equalizing can happen on Bearing and Drift too as it is.

No, the Dragoons are not a threat for Classic. Spinning left is literally the only thing to their name that makes them usable, and their lack of consistency and poor equalization gives you several ways to beat them even on max LAD drivers in opposite spin. They are far from an ultimate combo.

Ok, so what you’re saying is that they are only usable since they are lefts and that they have horrible spin stealing shape? Ok sure, but it’s zone’+z! I mean the best LAD driver used for rights against rights is absorb like you said. You really think the absorb combo stands a 1% chance against the opposite spin zone’+z combo? Like why is rage on drift so good against tempest on Xtend+? That’s an example. Rage and 3A are horrible equalizers, while tempest, 1S, wheel, and Xtend+ are all top tier LAD drivers but rage still wins because of the driver advantage. And that’s Xtend+ vs drift, two top tier drivers. With absorb vs zone’+z absorb is like at best on the low end of mid-LAD drivers. Case in point.

(Oct. 05, 2021  10:54 PM)MagikHorse Wrote: Also, it's "case and point", not "case in point", and it's a declaration that you've won... Once again another unneeded statement and also just wrong here entirely. Please, stop saying things like that. It makes it really annoying to reply to you.

(Oct. 06, 2021  5:05 AM)th!nk Wrote:

(Oct. 05, 2021  10:54 PM)MagikHorse Wrote: Also, it's "case and point", not "case in point", and it's a declaration that you've won... Once again another unneeded statement and also just wrong here entirely. Please, stop saying things like that. It makes it really annoying to reply to you.

Sorry man, I hope this doesn't seem like I'm coming after you but as someone who uses case in point every so often at work I double checked this and it's definitely "case in point" - https://writingexplained.org/case-in-point-case-or-case-and-point . However, it is not generally used as a standalone sentence as in that post.

(Oct. 06, 2021  5:05 AM)th!nk Wrote: I'm really not sure who would run two identical drivers like Dr and MDr or Br and Br' in deck. This seems like a good way to get stomped. Meanwhile you would ban X' and Mx' which actually does hit a practical and fun way of doing things - and interestingly lets you stack your deck harder to beat drift. We must always consider the full impact of our requests before we make them - treat every rule change request like a monkey paw. In this case, a rule like this would be more likely to actually encourage more LAD spam...

(Oct. 06, 2021  7:32 AM)MagikHorse Wrote: Burst has alternatives to Xtreme' such as Quick' or Jolt', so it can be worked around on the rubber flat front better just by virtue of multiple very similar variations of the same thing existing... but the same thing is true of Drift as well being interchangeable by a myriad of other drivers too. All this rule really does is force variation for the sake of variation, and limits people's options. What if someone only has Metal Xtreme and an Xtreme' for their Attack types? Sure, I don't like having to pull out scenarios like this, but tournaments are built on being inclusive and this rule only makes that harder.

(And yes, I know I yelled at someone for pulling out a "what if" scenario like this regarding people with limited part selections, but that one was simply using it as a reason to say that a part was too strong and not easy enough to counter. Using it as a means to bash a part as "too OP" is not going to cut it, people not having the parts to beat another part doesn't mean those parts don't exist, and they can always ask to borrow from others anyways. Tournament inclusivity, on the other hand, is an actual goal for the WBO and something worth bringing this sort of scenario up for, as it could possibly harm someone with a smaller collection quite unfairly if suddenly their small collection isn't fully usable just for this hackneyed attempt at "balance".)

(Oct. 06, 2021  9:26 AM)th!nk Wrote:

(Oct. 06, 2021  7:32 AM)MagikHorse Wrote: Burst has alternatives to Xtreme' such as Quick' or Jolt', so it can be worked around on the rubber flat front better just by virtue of multiple very similar variations of the same thing existing... but the same thing is true of Drift as well being interchangeable by a myriad of other drivers too. All this rule really does is force variation for the sake of variation, and limits people's options. What if someone only has Metal Xtreme and an Xtreme' for their Attack types? Sure, I don't like having to pull out scenarios like this, but tournaments are built on being inclusive and this rule only makes that harder.

(And yes, I know I yelled at someone for pulling out a "what if" scenario like this regarding people with limited part selections, but that one was simply using it as a reason to say that a part was too strong and not easy enough to counter. Using it as a means to bash a part as "too OP" is not going to cut it, people not having the parts to beat another part doesn't mean those parts don't exist, and they can always ask to borrow from others anyways. Tournament inclusivity, on the other hand, is an actual goal for the WBO and something worth bringing this sort of scenario up for, as it could possibly harm someone with a smaller collection quite unfairly if suddenly their small collection isn't fully usable just for this hackneyed attempt at "balance".)

We're fully in agreement here - in fact I know Dan recently used X and MX in the same deck in TO, including running a full-attack Deck, so you're not even pulling it out, this is very much a thing. Like you I hate variation for the sake of variation. Some people do like to play a certain style, it feels odd telling them they can't play it all the way through in this way.
There are alternatives but... Why should it be necessary - and is the next step people want to take banning "types" of drivers? When people are already hamstringing themselves by choosing two drifts (grats you lose one round in same spin or by LAD or suffer endless draws) or two bearings (Guilty Sends Its Regards), I'm not sure more action is needed to discourage them. They already can't use the same layer twice, I think that is sufficient. You could use it to stack a deck if you know your opponent doesn't have a counter to a certain type of combo, but I think that should never be a safe assumption anyway (if we can get rid of the ridiculous part announcement rule, it becomes a much riskier decision, but anyone could be hiding new parts knowing you'll do this), and also you will probably win anyway.

I will always bring up inclusiveness as well. Honestly, deck format annoys me in general for this (and as I've said many times, flat Does Not Work for Plastics (I mean, I'm putting words in their mouths but there are players famous for using one part or type like Guardian Odin too, but even without that it just crushes the format into Circle Survivor, Zombie/DZombie, Attack/Driger V2 Maybe), requiring people to have 3 good combos whereas back in the day you could place with Earth Aquila and luck - and watching kids pull that off is heartwarming to me. I don't like forcing people to Spend More Money than necessary to put a Beyblade in the dish. If we are forcing deck, then we still need to be as permissive as possible to try to limit the imposition on kids to play a game designed for kids - even if we treat it as a sport. That means no restrictions like this.

Lastly, again we're having another discussion about banning things before we've even seen what they do. I don't get why people are like this now.

(Oct. 06, 2021  4:51 PM)HakaishinLDrago Wrote: From what I've seen/discussed with others via discord, most people who are asking to ban parts either don't have the part and are just basing it off videos, haven't been to tournaments at all, haven't tested the parts, and etc (the list can go on but I'm not gonna make a long paragraph of examples)

(Oct. 06, 2021  5:04 PM)TheRogueBlader Wrote:

(Oct. 06, 2021  4:51 PM)HakaishinLDrago Wrote: From what I've seen/discussed with others via discord, most people who are asking to ban parts either don't have the part and are just basing it off videos, haven't been to tournaments at all, haven't tested the parts, and etc (the list can go on but I'm not gonna make a long paragraph of examples)

Not to sound like a stalker, but you’ve only been to 1 tournament. I wouldn’t go around making assumptions that people don’t have the part or are basing it off videos, or haven’t tested or anything else you said. Just to give an example, I have the drift driver that I have been talking about not having 2 in the deck, and that’s why I have the knowledge that having 2 drifts in a deck would make it OP. Some people don’t have the parts but I assure you most people do and if they haven’t tested then they wouldn’t be trying to ban it.

(Oct. 06, 2021  5:13 PM)HakaishinLDrago Wrote:

(Oct. 06, 2021  5:04 PM)TheRogueBlader Wrote: Not to sound like a stalker, but you’ve only been to 1 tournament. I wouldn’t go around making assumptions that people don’t have the part or are basing it off videos, or haven’t tested or anything else you said. Just to give an example, I have the drift driver that I have been talking about not having 2 in the deck, and that’s why I have the knowledge that having 2 drifts in a deck would make it OP. Some people don’t have the parts but I assure you most people do and if they haven’t tested then they wouldn’t be trying to ban it.

I said and I quote: "From what I've seen/discussed with others via discord" it's not just me making "assumptions"

(Oct. 06, 2021  4:51 PM)HakaishinLDrago Wrote:

(Oct. 06, 2021  9:26 AM)th!nk Wrote: We're fully in agreement here - in fact I know Dan recently used X and MX in the same deck in TO, including running a full-attack Deck, so you're not even pulling it out, this is very much a thing. Like you I hate variation for the sake of variation. Some people do like to play a certain style, it feels odd telling them they can't play it all the way through in this way.
There are alternatives but... Why should it be necessary - and is the next step people want to take banning "types" of drivers? When people are already hamstringing themselves by choosing two drifts (grats you lose one round in same spin or by LAD or suffer endless draws) or two bearings (Guilty Sends Its Regards), I'm not sure more action is needed to discourage them. They already can't use the same layer twice, I think that is sufficient. You could use it to stack a deck if you know your opponent doesn't have a counter to a certain type of combo, but I think that should never be a safe assumption anyway (if we can get rid of the ridiculous part announcement rule, it becomes a much riskier decision, but anyone could be hiding new parts knowing you'll do this), and also you will probably win anyway.

I will always bring up inclusiveness as well. Honestly, deck format annoys me in general for this (and as I've said many times, flat Does Not Work for Plastics (I mean, I'm putting words in their mouths but there are players famous for using one part or type like Guardian Odin too, but even without that it just crushes the format into Circle Survivor, Zombie/DZombie, Attack/Driger V2 Maybe), requiring people to have 3 good combos whereas back in the day you could place with Earth Aquila and luck - and watching kids pull that off is heartwarming to me. I don't like forcing people to Spend More Money than necessary to put a Beyblade in the dish. If we are forcing deck, then we still need to be as permissive as possible to try to limit the imposition on kids to play a game designed for kids - even if we treat it as a sport. That means no restrictions like this.

Lastly, again we're having another discussion about banning things before we've even seen what they do. I don't get why people are like this now.

From what I've seen/discussed with others via discord, most people who are asking to ban parts either don't have the part and are just basing it off videos, haven't been to tournaments at all, haven't tested the parts, and etc (the list can go on but I'm not gonna make a long paragraph of examples).

(Oct. 06, 2021  5:21 PM)originalzankye Wrote:

(Oct. 06, 2021  4:51 PM)HakaishinLDrago Wrote: From what I've seen/discussed with others via discord, most people who are asking to ban parts either don't have the part and are just basing it off videos, haven't been to tournaments at all, haven't tested the parts, and etc (the list can go on but I'm not gonna make a long paragraph of examples).

Yeah pretty much this, people have limited tournament knowledge or don't even have a part and either assume a part is really bad or it should be banned, people need to avoid being so ban trigger happy for Burst Standard.