(Oct. 29, 2021  4:05 PM)froztz Wrote: An update on rules for October:

1. Almight is banned in Classic.
   
2. For formats with multiple beyblade selection(P3C1/3on3/Deck), only one version(for example regular/Dash/SlingShock/Hypersphere/Metal) of a Driver is permitted in deck format.
   

(Oct. 29, 2021  4:46 PM)DeceasedCrab Wrote:

(Oct. 29, 2021  4:05 PM)froztz Wrote: An update on rules for October:

1. Almight is banned in Classic.
   
2. For formats with multiple beyblade selection(P3C1/3on3/Deck), only one version(for example regular/Dash/SlingShock/Hypersphere/Metal) of a Driver is permitted.
   

That's kind of a major announcement here! Might need another full thread if you're saying what I think you are. Do you mean that in any tournaments tomorrow, that both drift and drift metal will not be permitted in a single deck in the deck format finals?

(Oct. 29, 2021  5:02 PM)CrisisCrusher07 Wrote:

(Oct. 29, 2021  4:05 PM)froztz Wrote: An update on rules for October:

1. Almight is banned in Classic.
   
2. For formats with multiple beyblade selection(P3C1/3on3/Deck), only one version(for example regular/Dash/SlingShock/Hypersphere/Metal) of a Driver is permitted in deck format.
   

This was something I brought up when I saw we were getting bearing dash and metal drift. Since their releases I have seen several decks in the winning combination thread abusing 2 versions of the same driver. I’m really glad to see this change! On the topic of this change I only have 1 question. Are “High” drivers considered different than the other versions of the drivers since their performance with how they interact with different disks, layers, and even stadiums can be a lot different than just having a tighter spring like the other driver versions? I’m fine with either ruling I just want to clarify.

(Oct. 29, 2021  5:08 PM)The Supreme One Wrote:

(Oct. 29, 2021  5:02 PM)CrisisCrusher07 Wrote: This was something I brought up when I saw we were getting bearing dash and metal drift. Since their releases I have seen several decks in the winning combination thread abusing 2 versions of the same driver. I’m really glad to see this change! On the topic of this change I only have 1 question. Are “High” drivers considered different than the other versions of the drivers since their performance with how they interact with different disks, layers, and even stadiums can be a lot different than just having a tighter spring like the other driver versions? I’m fine with either ruling I just want to clarify.

Thanks Crisis! Your feedback certainly helped contribute to this change  For the sake of clarity and future-proofing the format, high drivers are considered the same part, since they are same-name driver variants.

(Oct. 29, 2021  5:10 PM)BuilderROB Wrote: Out of interest, are parts such as Orbit Metal and Charge Metal also included in this rule? They’re technically different drivers, but I’m not sure how it would be ruled since Hypersphere versions of drivers are banned, and they perform completely different from their regular versions.

(Oct. 29, 2021  5:44 PM)Shindog Wrote:

(Oct. 29, 2021  5:10 PM)BuilderROB Wrote: Out of interest, are parts such as Orbit Metal and Charge Metal also included in this rule? They’re technically different drivers, but I’m not sure how it would be ruled since Hypersphere versions of drivers are banned, and they perform completely different from their regular versions.

If I understand correctly, with this change, apparently Hunter and Hunter-S will not be able to be repeated for example.  Evolution and Evolutionary-Sp, however, can be repeated. And yes, you will not be able to repeat charge, charge’ charge metal, charge i, ii, iii-H in a deck

(Oct. 29, 2021  5:49 PM)Kaizoku Burst Wrote:

(Oct. 29, 2021  5:44 PM)Shindog Wrote: If I understand correctly, with this change, apparently Hunter and Hunter-S will not be able to be repeated for example.  Evolution and Evolutionary-Sp, however, can be repeated. And yes, you will not be able to repeat charge, charge’ charge metal, charge i, ii, iii-H in a deck

Is it based on the name of the Driver, then? For instance, Evolution and Evolutional-SP can be repeated, but Drift and Drift-SP cannot?

(Oct. 29, 2021  5:02 PM)CrisisCrusher07 Wrote: This was something I brought up when I saw we were getting bearing dash and metal drift. Since their releases I have seen several decks in the winning combination thread abusing 2 versions of the same driver. I’m really glad to see this change! On the topic of this change I only have 1 question. Are “High” drivers considered different than the other versions of the drivers since their performance with how they interact with different disks, layers, and even stadiums can be a lot different than just having a tighter spring like the other driver versions? I’m fine with either ruling I just want to clarify.

(Oct. 29, 2021  4:05 PM)froztz Wrote: An update on rules for October:

1. Almight is banned in Classic.
   
2. For formats with multiple beyblade selection(P3C1/3on3/Deck), only one version(for example regular/Dash/SlingShock/Hypersphere/Metal/High etc.) of a Driver is permitted in deck format.
   

(Oct. 29, 2021  5:57 PM)Shindog Wrote:

(Oct. 29, 2021  5:49 PM)Kaizoku Burst Wrote: Is it based on the name of the Driver, then? For instance, Evolution and Evolutional-SP can be repeated, but Drift and Drift-SP cannot?

I believe so. So like Zoning repeatable with either  Zone’ or Zone. Yeah, I believe you are correct about Drift and Drift-Sp

(Oct. 29, 2021  6:13 PM)MagikHorse Wrote:

(Oct. 29, 2021  5:02 PM)CrisisCrusher07 Wrote: This was something I brought up when I saw we were getting bearing dash and metal drift. Since their releases I have seen several decks in the winning combination thread abusing 2 versions of the same driver. I’m really glad to see this change! On the topic of this change I only have 1 question. Are “High” drivers considered different than the other versions of the drivers since their performance with how they interact with different disks, layers, and even stadiums can be a lot different than just having a tighter spring like the other driver versions? I’m fine with either ruling I just want to clarify.

Is this something that's actually happening up by you, or is there more going on here? It certainly wasn't happening up in Carmel at all at any rate, which may show that it's strictly a regional thing. Still, read below, because I have a lot to say about this.

(Oct. 29, 2021  4:05 PM)froztz Wrote: An update on rules for October:

1. Almight is banned in Classic.
   
2. For formats with multiple beyblade selection(P3C1/3on3/Deck), only one version(for example regular/Dash/SlingShock/Hypersphere/Metal/High etc.) of a Driver is permitted in deck format.
   

Questions: Is the problem that people can do it, or a lack of thinking about how to counter these strategies entirely? My argument here is that it's the latter.

This rule is very clearly meant to stop double Bearing and double Drift, let's not kid ourselves here, but in doing so you're hurting its counters as well as plenty of other strategies. What about double Atomic from someone using Atomic-S? Has that ever been a problem in the past, maybe in Burst Limited or something? Is more than one variant of Charge (Charge'/Charge Metal/Charge I-H, Charge II-H, Charge III-H, Charge Metal-SPM) too strong either? Hunter(') and Hunter-S? Why are we hurting so many other things in the way of just dealing with two "problems" that themselves still leave holes that can be easily exploited by anyone that really wants to put their mind to it? I mean heck, wanna beat Bearing or Drift? Try a little same-spin combo or two, you'll see wonders I assure you (this is coming from someone who has beaten Drift in opposite spin before with Orbit, with witnesses to prove it). I've been splashing in Orbit and Atomic in Indiana, and even almost used Moment, I don't see why you guys can't do that either. Don't have faith in your same-spin launching? Run more Attack to KO them before they have a chance, they're not impossible to KO or anything and Guilty does that job well... oh wait, we just got rid of Xtreme'/Xtreme/Metal Xtreme in the same deck. Ah well, whoops! That's a strategy we've lost now then, and here I just wanted to knock double Bearing around.

(Oct. 29, 2021  6:13 PM)MagikHorse Wrote:

(Oct. 29, 2021  5:02 PM)CrisisCrusher07 Wrote: This was something I brought up when I saw we were getting bearing dash and metal drift. Since their releases I have seen several decks in the winning combination thread abusing 2 versions of the same driver. I’m really glad to see this change! On the topic of this change I only have 1 question. Are “High” drivers considered different than the other versions of the drivers since their performance with how they interact with different disks, layers, and even stadiums can be a lot different than just having a tighter spring like the other driver versions? I’m fine with either ruling I just want to clarify.

Is this something that's actually happening up by you, or is there more going on here? It certainly wasn't happening up in Carmel at all at any rate, which may show that it's strictly a regional thing. Still, read below, because I have a lot to say about this.

(Oct. 29, 2021  6:13 PM)MagikHorse Wrote:

(Oct. 29, 2021  4:05 PM)froztz Wrote: An update on rules for October:

1. Almight is banned in Classic.
   
2. For formats with multiple beyblade selection(P3C1/3on3/Deck), only one version(for example regular/Dash/SlingShock/Hypersphere/Metal/High etc.) of a Driver is permitted in deck format.
   

Spoiler (Click to View)

Questions: Is the problem that people can do it, or a lack of thinking about how to counter these strategies entirely? My argument here is that it's the latter.

This rule is very clearly meant to stop double Bearing and double Drift, let's not kid ourselves here, but in doing so you're hurting its counters as well as plenty of other strategies. What about double Atomic from someone using Atomic-S? Has that ever been a problem in the past, maybe in Burst Limited or something? Is more than one variant of Charge (Charge'/Charge Metal/Charge I-H, Charge II-H, Charge III-H, Charge Metal-SPM) too strong either? Hunter(') and Hunter-S? Why are we hurting so many other things in the way of just dealing with two "problems" that themselves still leave holes that can be easily exploited by anyone that really wants to put their mind to it? I mean heck, wanna beat Bearing or Drift? Try a little same-spin combo or two, you'll see wonders I assure you (this is coming from someone who has beaten Drift in opposite spin before with Orbit, with witnesses to prove it). I've been splashing in Orbit and Atomic in Indiana, and even almost used Moment, I don't see why you guys can't do that either. Don't have faith in your same-spin launching? Run more Attack to KO them before they have a chance, they're not impossible to KO or anything and Guilty does that job well... oh wait, we just got rid of Xtreme'/Xtreme/Metal Xtreme in the same deck. Ah well, whoops! That's a strategy we've lost now then, and here I just wanted to knock double Bearing around.

I think it's another case of a poor, uncreative mindset that isn't trying to find counters to these strategies and/or is completely unwilling to take risks shouting for bans. This unwillingness to try and counter these strategies has been something I've been chastising this site as a whole over for months, and yet we've still reached this point despite it to the point where it's actually affecting the game as a whole. No, the issue isn't the parts but rather the players, and overall this ban is a bigger hindrance than a help and squashes just as much if not more of the counterplay.

I must admit, I'm actually appalled by this decision and would see it reversed. This is not needed, it hinders those with lower access to parts, and there are better ways to deal with these basic strategies than banning these repeated parts.

(Oct. 29, 2021  6:13 PM)MagikHorse Wrote:

(Oct. 29, 2021  5:57 PM)Shindog Wrote: I believe so. So like Zoning repeatable with either  Zone’ or Zone. Yeah, I believe you are correct about Drift and Drift-Sp

And the fact that this even has to be said is dumb as a sack of bricks as well, and leads to a ton of Hasbro confusion.

(Oct. 29, 2021  5:57 PM)Shindog Wrote:

(Oct. 29, 2021  5:49 PM)Kaizoku Burst Wrote: Is it based on the name of the Driver, then? For instance, Evolution and Evolutional-SP can be repeated, but Drift and Drift-SP cannot?

I believe so. So like Zoning repeatable with either  Zone’ or Zone. Yeah, I believe you are correct about Drift and Drift-Sp

(Oct. 29, 2021  6:13 PM)MagikHorse Wrote:

(Oct. 29, 2021  5:02 PM)CrisisCrusher07 Wrote: This was something I brought up when I saw we were getting bearing dash and metal drift. Since their releases I have seen several decks in the winning combination thread abusing 2 versions of the same driver. I’m really glad to see this change! On the topic of this change I only have 1 question. Are “High” drivers considered different than the other versions of the drivers since their performance with how they interact with different disks, layers, and even stadiums can be a lot different than just having a tighter spring like the other driver versions? I’m fine with either ruling I just want to clarify.

Is this something that's actually happening up by you, or is there more going on here? It certainly wasn't happening up in Carmel at all at any rate, which may show that it's strictly a regional thing. Still, read below, because I have a lot to say about this.

(Oct. 29, 2021  4:05 PM)froztz Wrote: An update on rules for October:

1. Almight is banned in Classic.
   
2. For formats with multiple beyblade selection(P3C1/3on3/Deck), only one version(for example regular/Dash/SlingShock/Hypersphere/Metal/High etc.) of a Driver is permitted in deck format.
   

Questions: Is the problem that people can do it, or a lack of thinking about how to counter these strategies entirely? My argument here is that it's the latter.

This rule is very clearly meant to stop double Bearing and double Drift, let's not kid ourselves here, but in doing so you're hurting its counters as well as plenty of other strategies. What about double Atomic from someone using Atomic-S? Has that ever been a problem in the past, maybe in Burst Limited or something? Is more than one variant of Charge (Charge'/Charge Metal/Charge I-H, Charge II-H, Charge III-H, Charge Metal-SPM) too strong either? Hunter(') and Hunter-S? Why are we hurting so many other things in the way of just dealing with two "problems" that themselves still leave holes that can be easily exploited by anyone that really wants to put their mind to it? I mean heck, wanna beat Bearing or Drift? Try a little same-spin combo or two, you'll see wonders I assure you (this is coming from someone who has beaten Drift in opposite spin before with Orbit, with witnesses to prove it). I've been splashing in Orbit and Atomic in Indiana, and even almost used Moment, I don't see why you guys can't do that either. Don't have faith in your same-spin launching? Run more Attack to KO them before they have a chance, they're not impossible to KO or anything and Guilty does that job well... oh wait, we just got rid of Xtreme'/Xtreme/Metal Xtreme in the same deck. Ah well, whoops! That's a strategy we've lost now then, and here I just wanted to knock double Bearing around.

I think it's another case of a poor, uncreative mindset that isn't trying to find counters to these strategies and/or is completely unwilling to take risks shouting for bans. This unwillingness to try and counter these strategies has been something I've been chastising this site as a whole over for months, and yet we've still reached this point despite it to the point where it's actually affecting the game as a whole. No, the issue isn't the parts but rather the players, and overall this ban is a bigger hindrance than a help and squashes just as much if not more of the counterplay.

I must admit, I'm actually appalled by this decision and would see it reversed. This is not needed, it hinders those with lower access to parts, and there are better ways to deal with these basic strategies than banning these repeated parts.

---

(Oct. 29, 2021  5:57 PM)Shindog Wrote: I believe so. So like Zoning repeatable with either  Zone’ or Zone. Yeah, I believe you are correct about Drift and Drift-Sp

And the fact that this even has to be said is dumb as a sack of bricks as well, and leads to a ton of Hasbro confusion.

(Oct. 29, 2021  6:47 PM)Dan Wrote: How many events have happened between the Bearing' release and today, serious question? And how many of those were dominated by two Bearings?
...
Usually we should see how things progress before we come to make decisions like this. It has been 20 days since Bearing' release, and sub-10 tournaments. Over these events, the kind of dominance you'd expect a rule change to be dedicated to, doesn't seem to be the happening, at least not yet? I'm not seeing an overwhelming amount of Bearing' + Bearing in WC.
...
I think the intentions here are correct, we should be wary of part dominance, but you actually have to be able to prove that dominance exists. So, if you have a really low sample size which also doesn't even seem conclusive, that isn't quite good enough to determine that X or Y part is really broken beyond measure and should be regulated. Not to mention adaptation doesn't happen within the same tournament usually.. So we have no actual understanding of how having access to two Bearing changes things, and whether it would be meaningful and negative change. There really hasn't been enough time in my opinion.

(Oct. 29, 2021  7:04 PM)BladerGem Wrote:

(Oct. 29, 2021  5:57 PM)Shindog Wrote: I believe so. So like Zoning repeatable with either  Zone’ or Zone. Yeah, I believe you are correct about Drift and Drift-Sp

I don't keep up with Hasbro nowadays, but isn't Zoning just the Hasbro name for Zone? Same with Evolutional and Evolution. Surely they would fall under this ruling as well, would they not? Especially if we're considering Hypersphere drivers to be equivalent to their non-hypersphere counterparts.

(Oct. 29, 2021  7:04 PM)BladerGem Wrote:

(Oct. 29, 2021  5:57 PM)Shindog Wrote: I believe so. So like Zoning repeatable with either  Zone’ or Zone. Yeah, I believe you are correct about Drift and Drift-Sp

I don't keep up with Hasbro nowadays, but isn't Zoning just the Hasbro name for Zone? Same with Evolutional and Evolution. Surely they would fall under this ruling as well, would they not? Especially if we're considering Hypersphere drivers to be equivalent to their non-hypersphere counterparts.

(Oct. 29, 2021  7:27 PM)Shindog Wrote:

(Oct. 29, 2021  7:04 PM)BladerGem Wrote: I don't keep up with Hasbro nowadays, but isn't Zoning just the Hasbro name for Zone? Same with Evolutional and Evolution. Surely they would fall under this ruling as well, would they not? Especially if we're considering Hypersphere drivers to be equivalent to their non-hypersphere counterparts.

No, I have been told they do not fall under the same umbrella.  I can’t fully explain it because I am not entirely sure I understand.

(Oct. 29, 2021  7:16 PM)CrisisCrusher07 Wrote:

(Oct. 29, 2021  6:13 PM)MagikHorse Wrote: Is this something that's actually happening up by you, or is there more going on here? It certainly wasn't happening up in Carmel at all at any rate, which may show that it's strictly a regional thing. Still, read below, because I have a lot to say about this.


Questions: Is the problem that people can do it, or a lack of thinking about how to counter these strategies entirely? My argument here is that it's the latter.

This rule is very clearly meant to stop double Bearing and double Drift, let's not kid ourselves here, but in doing so you're hurting its counters as well as plenty of other strategies. What about double Atomic from someone using Atomic-S? Has that ever been a problem in the past, maybe in Burst Limited or something? Is more than one variant of Charge (Charge'/Charge Metal/Charge I-H, Charge II-H, Charge III-H, Charge Metal-SPM) too strong either? Hunter(') and Hunter-S? Why are we hurting so many other things in the way of just dealing with two "problems" that themselves still leave holes that can be easily exploited by anyone that really wants to put their mind to it? I mean heck, wanna beat Bearing or Drift? Try a little same-spin combo or two, you'll see wonders I assure you (this is coming from someone who has beaten Drift in opposite spin before with Orbit, with witnesses to prove it). I've been splashing in Orbit and Atomic in Indiana, and even almost used Moment, I don't see why you guys can't do that either. Don't have faith in your same-spin launching? Run more Attack to KO them before they have a chance, they're not impossible to KO or anything and Guilty does that job well... oh wait, we just got rid of Xtreme'/Xtreme/Metal Xtreme in the same deck. Ah well, whoops! That's a strategy we've lost now then, and here I just wanted to knock double Bearing around.

I think it's another case of a poor, uncreative mindset that isn't trying to find counters to these strategies and/or is completely unwilling to take risks shouting for bans. This unwillingness to try and counter these strategies has been something I've been chastising this site as a whole over for months, and yet we've still reached this point despite it to the point where it's actually affecting the game as a whole. No, the issue isn't the parts but rather the players, and overall this ban is a bigger hindrance than a help and squashes just as much if not more of the counterplay.

I must admit, I'm actually appalled by this decision and would see it reversed. This is not needed, it hinders those with lower access to parts, and there are better ways to deal with these basic strategies than banning these repeated parts.

---

And the fact that this even has to be said is dumb as a sack of bricks as well, and leads to a ton of Hasbro confusion.

To answer your question the weekend after bearing' cane out I hosted a tournament in Silver Springs MD. I know the community there well and knew that people were going to try out double drift or double bearing decks. Once top 8 finals started there were 3 people using one of these 2 strategies. I was using double drift and was knocked out of the top 8 by a pretty lucky KO. Geetser99 made it to 3rd place with double bearing in his deck and a Blader with this only being her second time participating in a tournament (because she is a regular Blader's Mom) got 4th with double drift. She actually could of won but doesn't know enough about the game to select good counters. Then I looked through the WBO winning combos thread and saw that over a few of the standard tournaments there were more people adopting this strategy. 
 
now let's talk about how you say to make a deck to counter these strategies. Well how can you do that if you don't know what they are going to run? Say you build a deck to beat double bearing, but you get up to the stadium to see they are using double drift. Well you now have a super unfavorable match up. Or we can go the opposite way where You build a deck to beat double drift and yet your opponent decides to run double Bearing. It would be a super feel bad day because you lost to the wrong choice in match up. Not because you were less skilled.
 
Speaking of skill.... What about forcing Bladers to think more about their combos? You can say people arent thinking and need to get good because they are just running double drift and bearing. Well what if someone is good with Destroy? They can build a deck with 3 different destroy combos thanks to destroy, destroy' and Metal destroy. Well where is the skill in that if they don't really have to spread out their parts? That had no thought process what so ever. Just throw a version of destroy on every bey and go. I think the community wants to see Bladers win for their innovation and skill. Not because they are a 1 trick pony.

(Oct. 29, 2021  7:42 PM)The Supreme One Wrote:

(Oct. 29, 2021  7:27 PM)Shindog Wrote: No, I have been told they do not fall under the same umbrella.  I can’t fully explain it because I am not entirely sure I understand.

This is my fault - yes, they would no longer be permitted. I'm not as familiar with Hasbro drivers and misunderstood them to be two separate parts rather than just renames. I will make sure that we update the rulebook to cover both Takara Tomy parts and their Hasbro renames in our rulings as we have done in the past.

(Oct. 29, 2021  7:46 PM)Shindog Wrote:

(Oct. 29, 2021  7:42 PM)The Supreme One Wrote: This is my fault - yes, they would no longer be permitted. I'm not as familiar with Hasbro drivers and misunderstood them to be two separate parts rather than just renames. I will make sure that we update the rulebook to cover both Takara Tomy parts and their Hasbro renames in our rulings as we have done in the past.

This would apply to something even like Keep and Keeper-S?
One is a ball and the other is a flat.
At least they start off that way.
It might get difficult if we do down the road of similar names.