+- World Beyblade Organization (https://worldbeyblade.org)
+-- Forum: World Beyblade Organization (https://worldbeyblade.org/Forum-World-Beyblade-Organization)
+--- Forum: Discuss worldbeyblade.org (https://worldbeyblade.org/Forum-Discuss-worldbeyblade-org)
+--- Thread: Burst Classic - New Format Feedback & Discussion (/Thread-Burst-Classic-New-Format-Feedback-Discussion)
RE: Burst Classic - New Format Feedback & Discussion - Siⱺn - Jan. 29, 2019
(Jan. 29, 2019 11:23 PM)kjrules17 Wrote:(Jan. 29, 2019 11:06 PM)Siⱺn Wrote: Actually, I'd like to propose something that would give tons of other drivers a chance.If you really want to make a case for this, you gotta do some testing to show why the meta for Classic would benefit from every free-spinning Driver being banned.
What if any driver with at least one freely rotating part (meaning any component is able to make a full 360 degree turn in any direction independent of the rest of the driver) is not allowed in classic?
This would give many other defense-stamina drivers a chance instead of what I know is going to be a free-spinning stamina+destroy driver funfest, which Flame~Capricorn pointed out to me.
This would give a slight edge to attack types (which is beneficial since they take much more skill to control than the other types) while making defense-stamina players take a little more thought into their combos.
I can make an argument for it, actually.
The whole purpose of burst classic is akin to the MFB Limited format: Making a format that restricts current-meta parts to allow for formerly viable and top tier parts to be used again. This has been done for both layers and discs.
That said, the same can't be said for drivers. Most top tier Defense and Stamina drivers utilize some form of freely rotating component in the driver, such as: Bearing, Orbit, Revolve, and Eternal, just to name the few I see used often that are also allowed in this format.
As Flame Capricorn said, If Destroy (another driver that uses a freely rotating part) were removed, then all hell would break loose with stamina, defense, and Stamina-Defense types that have plagued the burst meta since the God Layer era.
I'm just saying it would open up more part use. If you could name a part that would overpower the meta with all free-spinning component drivers banned, please let me know.
RE: Burst Classic - New Format Feedback & Discussion - DeceasedCrab - Jan. 29, 2019
I'm impressed by how devoted you are to making Attack types infeasible for people unless they "git gud". But actually I find it kind of gross.
"Attack was always known for the skill needed to use it. Destroy is too effective for attack with little needed skill... If someone wants to use attack they need to have the skills to actually use it instead of using a driver that does all the work for them. "
Once again we hear more chants of "Oh no, it's good, let's ban it." How about no. You're intentionally trying to add barriers for entire types for people. That's just a gross thing to say.
For reference, Orbit and Revolve have been around since Dual layers, even though they're a bit less powerful than modern free-spinning counterparts.
I admit, stamina and defense types are really dominated by those free-spinning parts, probably because they're actually good as opposed to most of the performance tips which range from "Why?" to "No". TT and Hasbro should really just make more kinds of tips with free-spinning parts. Let's evolve in a positive direction instead of stagnating.
"If you really want to make a case for this, you gotta do some testing to show why the meta for Classic would benefit from every free-spinning Driver being banned."
"I can make an argument for it, actually. "
An argument is not sufficient. Testing is. Go for it. Restricting tips like discs and layers are restricted is not a bad idea, but you have to put in the testing to prove why a ban is necessary. The committee tested this thoroughly. Now it's your turn.
RE: Burst Classic - New Format Feedback & Discussion - Flame~Capricorn - Jan. 30, 2019
(Jan. 29, 2019 11:36 PM)Siⱺn Wrote:(Jan. 29, 2019 11:23 PM)kjrules17 Wrote: If you really want to make a case for this, you gotta do some testing to show why the meta for Classic would benefit from every free-spinning Driver being banned.
I can make an argument for it, actually.
The whole purpose of burst classic is akin to the MFB Limited format: Making a format that restricts current-meta parts to allow for formerly viable and top tier parts to be used again. This has been done for both layers and discs.
That said, the same can't be said for drivers. Most top tier Defense and Stamina drivers utilize some form of freely rotating component in the driver, such as: Bearing, Orbit, Revolve, and Eternal, just to name the few I see used often that are also allowed in this format.
As Flame Capricorn said, If Destroy (another driver that uses a freely rotating part) were removed, then all hell would break loose with stamina, defense, and Stamina-Defense types that have plagued the burst meta since the God Layer era.
I'm just saying it would open up more part use. If you could name a part that would overpower the meta with all free-spinning component drivers banned, please let me know.
Hey, I would appreciate it if you didn't twist my words. I said destroy should be legal, not "let's make it so that destroy would be too good." I like that you're accepting my ideas, but I'm not on your side.
RE: Burst Classic - New Format Feedback & Discussion - AirKingNeo - Jan. 30, 2019
(Jan. 29, 2019 12:17 AM)The Supreme One Wrote:(Jan. 28, 2019 11:08 PM)AirKingNeo Wrote: It doesn't make sense why any of the dash drivers are banned besides possibly Z' and Ds'.
X', Hn', Z', and Ds' are the only competitively viable dash drivers. Makes no sense to ban B', A', M', Vl', and Zt'.
On the topic, is there any testing that's been done to give reason to ban Xt+?
It's all in the name of balance, really. Because attack is so viable, players should have no choice but to give up good stamina for better burst resistance. While Vl' could probably be unbanned, drivers like Z', A', Zt', Ds', etc. would be the default choice of many due to their decent stamina potential and burst resistance. This would make smash attack drivers like X/X', Hn/Hn', Jl, etc. unviable (since they are already countered by stallers) and put some of the more niche stamina drivers that are only good in classic because of their burst resistance out of commission.
Xt+ has been banned for the time being because of the threat it possesses as a flexible stamina driver with better burst resistance than Atomic, which is currently banned because of its good LAD and ability to avoid certain types of attack.
I can see 100% why Z' and Ds' would be banned. A' I feel like wouldn't be good enough to warrant a ban and should definitely be heavily tested before making any judgment. Zt' could be unbanned because, while you're very burst resistant, you'd lack the stamina and balance increase that Orbit gives and would definitely be beaten in a stamina battle against Revolve/Eternal, but I can definitely see the part getting banned if it went south for attack in testing.
I forgot to mention F' which can probably be unbanned, but should probably be under the eye of heavy testing like A' before making a judgment.
Vl', B', Mr', and I would presume Jl' should be unbanned without a doubt. Volcanic' is a smash attack driver like Xtreme', so it would fit right in with them. Blow' has the same issues Blow had, where it isn't wide enough to keep on balance well. Merge isn't a good driver whatsoever; a Dash upgrade isn't going to help it. Jolt' is just like Xtreme' and Hunter', so it should unbanned for the same reasons they are.
Xtend Plus I was just curious about.
(Jan. 29, 2019 11:06 PM)Siⱺn Wrote: Actually, I'd like to propose something that would give tons of other drivers a chance.
What if any driver with at least one freely rotating part (meaning any component is able to make a full 360 degree turn in any direction independent of the rest of the driver) is not allowed in classic?
This would give many other defense-stamina drivers a chance instead of what I know is going to be a free-spinning stamina+destroy driver funfest, which Flame~Capricorn pointed out to me.
This would give a slight edge to attack types (which is beneficial since they take much more skill to control than the other types) while making defense-stamina players take a little more thought into their combos.
This would, unironically, make classic an attack type only meta.
Just think what defensive and stamina drivers you could use. Press?? Massive?? Yielding?? Operate?? Dimension?? Zeta??
Do you think that can stand up to the power of Xtreme and Jolt? This would also unreasonably ban Volcanic.
RE: Burst Classic - New Format Feedback & Discussion - bladekid - Jan. 30, 2019
(Jan. 29, 2019 11:06 PM)Siⱺn Wrote: Actually, I'd like to propose something that would give tons of other drivers a chance.
What if any driver with at least one freely rotating part (meaning any component is able to make a full 360 degree turn in any direction independent of the rest of the driver) is not allowed in classic?
This would give many other defense-stamina drivers a chance instead of what I know is going to be a free-spinning stamina+destroy driver funfest, which Flame~Capricorn pointed out to me.
This would give a slight edge to attack types (which is beneficial since they take much more skill to control than the other types) while making defense-stamina players take a little more thought into their combos.
Most free spinning drivers were released before the god series and they aren't much of a problem at all. In that case, we should ban all rubber drivers, they are way too good and give defence and attack a huge advantage over stamina types. See why that argument also has flaws, just like how free spinning drivers aren't actually OP even though you can make a case for them, neither are rubber drivers, which you can actually make a better case for imo. Plus, removing free spinning drivers gives stamina nothing good or useful.
RE: Burst Classic - New Format Feedback & Discussion - Rebel Blader - Jan. 30, 2019
(Jan. 29, 2019 11:13 PM)Siⱺn Wrote:Both octa and bite are rare parts, claw can easily be beaten by stallers that leaves defense and yeilding to be the only viable dtiver for stamina/Defense imo it wont be a good decision and mostly stallers n mixed attackers would benefit the most from such a situation(Jan. 29, 2019 11:07 PM)Dt20000 Wrote: So parts like Orbit, Gyro, Revolve, Destroy, etc. would be banned?
Essentially. It would give attack far more viability while not being too harsh on defense and stamina, which still has drivers like: Bite, Octa, Friction, Yielding, and Claw, Just to name a few that I would use in this scenario.
RE: Burst Classic - New Format Feedback & Discussion - DeceasedCrab - Jan. 30, 2019
"Stop, stop, he's already dead!"
Sion's response to the concerns about his performance tip ideas was to try and delete his own account. I think we can stop replying to them.
Although he made some interesting points about tips not having nearly the amount of format bans that discs and layers do. Even though that really doesn't make a difference.
We can get back to fighting about dash drivers now.
Maybe they're too strong and make bursting far less likely. That or they haven't been tested enough to safely add to the format.
RE: Burst Classic - New Format Feedback & Discussion - CheetoBlader - Jan. 30, 2019
I think we should ban all releases after Dual Layers including ‘ Drivers
RE: Burst Classic - New Format Feedback & Discussion - Angry Face - Jan. 31, 2019
(Jan. 30, 2019 9:17 PM)CheetoBlader Wrote: I think we should ban all releases after Dual Layers including ‘ Drivers
That certainly would be very classic, ha. It felt strange to be playing Turbo stuff in a format called Classic.
For all my gripes with Hasbro stuff, I'd feel totally fine with seeing everything Hasbro under the sun in a Limited Burst format.
RE: Burst Classic - New Format Feedback & Discussion - BurstMaster - Feb. 01, 2019
I have bite, it's not that good with same rotation matches, I don't think it would be a wise option to ban it,
and Octa. It's to off balance for defence, the only way you could use it would be in stationary attack, but even then it is outclassed by revolve and orbit
RE: Burst Classic - New Format Feedback & Discussion - Ntruder19 - Feb. 01, 2019
Maybe you could include some of the lighter core discs like 11, 12, and 13 but just not allow frames
RE: Burst Classic - New Format Feedback & Discussion - CheetoBlader - Feb. 02, 2019
(Feb. 01, 2019 11:57 PM)Ntruder19 Wrote: Maybe you could include some of the lighter core discs like 11, 12, and 13 but just not allow frames
Not 12 without a frame
RE: Burst Classic - New Format Feedback & Discussion - Ntruder19 - Feb. 02, 2019
Also, considering it includes post dual layer parts, it might make a little more sense to call it something like “lightweight” rather than classic.
(Feb. 02, 2019 12:00 AM)CheetoBlader Wrote:(Feb. 01, 2019 11:57 PM)Ntruder19 Wrote: Maybe you could include some of the lighter core discs like 11, 12, and 13 but just not allow frames
Not 12 without a frame
Oh yeah didn’t think about that
RE: Burst Classic - New Format Feedback & Discussion - Dt20000 - Feb. 02, 2019
(Feb. 02, 2019 12:01 AM)Ntruder19 Wrote: Also, considering it includes post dual layer parts, it might make a little more sense to call it something like “lightweight” rather than classic.
(Feb. 02, 2019 12:00 AM)CheetoBlader Wrote: Not 12 without a frame
Oh yeah didn’t think about that
Those newer parts are just there for the sake of slightly opening up the meta. The whole point of Classic is to use older parts
RE: Burst Classic - New Format Feedback & Discussion - Postal - Feb. 02, 2019
(Jan. 30, 2019 9:17 PM)CheetoBlader Wrote: I think we should ban all releases after Dual Layers including ‘ Drivers
Honestly this is exactly what I'd imagined when I heard about this format. This definitely keeps it classic.
RE: Burst Classic - New Format Feedback & Discussion - Dragunix - Feb. 02, 2019
Trying out some combos with Driger, Gigant Gaia, or even Wolborg against X.G.X' almost makes me wonder if X' could be problematic. It still bursts these layers relatively frequently even with a soft launch. Gaia seems more vulnerable than I expected.
RE: Burst Classic - New Format Feedback & Discussion - #Fafnir - Feb. 02, 2019
(Feb. 02, 2019 8:49 PM)Dragunix Wrote: Trying out some combos with Driger, Gigant Gaia, or even Wolborg against X.G.X' almost makes me wonder if X' could be problematic. It still bursts these layers relatively frequently even with a soft launch. Gaia seems more vulnerable than I expected.
RE: Burst Classic - New Format Feedback & Discussion - Dragunix - Feb. 02, 2019
(Feb. 02, 2019 8:55 PM)#Fafnir Wrote:(Feb. 02, 2019 8:49 PM)Dragunix Wrote: Trying out some combos with Driger, Gigant Gaia, or even Wolborg against X.G.X' almost makes me wonder if X' could be problematic. It still bursts these layers relatively frequently even with a soft launch. Gaia seems more vulnerable than I expected.
You may have to see @[kjrules17] on that. I don't have Hasbro G2 or Destroy.
RE: Burst Classic - New Format Feedback & Discussion - kjrules17 - Feb. 03, 2019
(Feb. 02, 2019 9:14 PM)Dragunix Wrote: You may have to see @[kjrules17] on that. I don't have Hasbro G2 or Destroy.I don't have Xtreme' though lol.
RE: Burst Classic - New Format Feedback & Discussion - Dragunix - Feb. 03, 2019
(Feb. 03, 2019 12:53 AM)kjrules17 Wrote:(Feb. 02, 2019 9:14 PM)Dragunix Wrote: You may have to see @[kjrules17] on that. I don't have Hasbro G2 or Destroy.I don't have Xtreme' though lol.
Fair enough, haha.
RE: Burst Classic - New Format Feedback & Discussion - ks123 - Feb. 04, 2019
I maked first Burst Classic Format rulebook: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1s_HmUPDX4sQZHGOowPip9snhxv8jtS4iDyRKfhmjnCA/edit?usp=sharing
RE: Burst Classic - New Format Feedback & Discussion - DeceasedCrab - Feb. 04, 2019
The rules don't say Slingshock drivers are banned in any way.
Highlight the pictures of the exceptions in Green, not Red.
RE: Burst Classic - New Format Feedback & Discussion - The Supreme One - Feb. 04, 2019
(Feb. 04, 2019 6:28 PM)ks123 Wrote: I maked first Burst Classic Format rulebook: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1s_HmUPDX4sQZHGOowPip9snhxv8jtS4iDyRKfhmjnCA/edit?usp=sharing
This is awesome! Nice job ks123
RE: Burst Classic - New Format Feedback & Discussion - #Fafnir - Feb. 04, 2019
(Feb. 04, 2019 6:28 PM)ks123 Wrote: I maked first Burst Classic Format rulebook: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1s_HmUPDX4sQZHGOowPip9snhxv8jtS4iDyRKfhmjnCA/edit?usp=sharing
Strike Valkyrie is banned for Takara Tomy. Hasbro's is not banned because it's just a Genesis Valtryek with a different inner chip mold.
RE: Burst Classic - New Format Feedback & Discussion - ks123 - Feb. 04, 2019
(Feb. 04, 2019 7:23 PM)#Fafnir Wrote:I fix this tomorrow(Feb. 04, 2019 6:28 PM)ks123 Wrote: I maked first Burst Classic Format rulebook: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1s_HmUPDX4sQZHGOowPip9snhxv8jtS4iDyRKfhmjnCA/edit?usp=sharing
Strike Valkyrie is banned for Takara Tomy. Hasbro's is not banned because it's just a Genesis Valtryek with a different inner chip mold.