Recently, upon release of The Shining Darkness (TSHD), I began to grow depressed at the thought that Yu-Gi-Oh!’s delicate balance was completely upended by the new X-Saber and Infernity archetypes. Nearly every duelist I spoke to agreed that these two new archetypes were extremely powerful and would form the next top tier. However, the YCS brought an unexpected winner to the forefront.
Now, I constantly see mocking posts in forums and on Facebook about how Gadgets(!) ended up winning the inaugural Yu-Gi-Oh! Championship Series event. Everyone “crying” at the gross overpowered nature of the new top tier (Infernities and X-Sabers) had to be wrong, right?
Unfortunately, public perception has been skewed. First of all, let’s clear up the facts. Then, let’s introduce a juicy truth that many of you are unaware of. It is undisputed that the final four of YCS Chantilly consisted of one Infernity deck, two X-Sabers, and one Gadget strategy (piloted by a well known cheater who was disqualified without prize at a previous event for lying to a judge and having marked sleeves).
What many of you don’t know is that the eventual winner actually faced off with Lazaro Bellido in the top eight match. Lazaro, playing Infernities, had control of the game with a Stardust Dragon and defense position Infernity Necromancer (presumably able to special summon either a Beetle or Archfiend the next turn) against his opponent’s topdeck. Peter Cheng then drew a Machina Force (the only card left in his deck to reverse the situation while topdecking) to special summon a Fortress. *Note: I am unclear whether Cheng had live Machina Gearframes left in the deck as well. Regardless, it was 1-3 possible cards total.* <!–more–>
If Lazaro had won, the final four would have consisted of two Infernity builds and two X-Saber builds, as predicted. Order would have likely been instated and Konami would have adjusted the list properly. The two strategies are simply the best of the format and far, far more powerful than standard tier 1 archetypes (although new threats have appeared).
The point isn’t to bemoan one duelist’s unfortunate luck. The point is to stress how one lucky draw can change Konami’s entire perception of a format. The duelists who bleat “look Gadgets won!” while ignoring the extenuating circumstances (a known cheater who played unfairly through swiss [eyewitness accounts confirm this] and then got extremely lucky in the championship rounds) are actually doing an incredible disservice to the game. Konami of USA tends to base its analysis of the format on the representation of different strategies at premier events and regionals.
Naturally, if a Gadget player wins the entire event, the sheer hegemony of InferSabers can be challenged. More players will grow convinced that the two strategies are actually balanced (when most Infernity duels are ending in less than three turns).
Time will tell if Peter Cheng’s devastating performance at YCS Chantilly will affect the future ban list and lead Konami to pull punches in curbing the two dominant archetypes.
Related posts:
While I do think that XSabers and Infernities are the two best decks right now, they are not so far above and beyond everything else. I think of them like LS last format, definitely the best deck, but they can still lose to their own inconsistencies or a skilled opponent. They’re not quite as good as people are making them out to be.
By “adjusting the list properly” I assume you mean some form of emergency ban? Otherwise, there’s still plenty of time/opportunity for an “InfernSaber” metagame to show it’s dominance, despite Peter the Cheater’s recent victory.
Also, it’s been said before – but all of the good Saber stuff is TCG Exclusive at the moment, which is really going to mess with ban lists (like it taking forever for CotLB to get restricted).
We’ll just have to wait for the next YCS and see how Chantilly affected the top decks. Our area (San Antonio TX) had 2 regional events 2 weekends in a row; the first one was the day of the YCS and the next one the weekend after. I know for a lot of people the first one was the “play for the heck of it and see what happens at the YCS” event- the playing field was said to be pretty varied (I didn’t go to the event). The second one however was said to contain a lot more sabers and infernities. I’m guessing we’ll see less quickdraw and gb’s and more saber and fernities for the next YCS. And i dunno, maybe frogs?
What (or which account)confirms that Cheng played unfairly during swiss?
decks are gay. put launcher and barrier to 1, put and hit sabers by some means, and the format actually has about 4 tier1 decks, which is, imo, what a format should be like. :X
I’m going to point out that Gadgets are probably a problem for the game too.
Cards like limiter removal allow them to otk in less than 3 turns as well (Gearframe + Machina Fortress alone =4300×2). This is ignoring the other cards such as Future Fusion, which also allows them to put an instant trap negator on the field and 4800 on the board for free on the turn.
My point is that Gadgets getting the spotlight isn’t so terrible either. There’s obviously unbalanced aspects that also need to be addressed in that deck (mainly limiter).
I’m going to preface my comment with this. I am by NO means an expert player nor do i keep tabs on the inner workings of other players save those I play against on a regular basis. What accusations are made against one player need to be proven to me by at least 3 different AND reliable sources before I’ll take it to heart.
A case in point is the last SJC i attended. My friends all warned me to fear Adam Corn. I never understood why, i mean Corn is a named player which already insinuated that he had a high degree of skill. Though the real reason they said this came to light after round 2. (again i know NONE of this to be true) Supposedly at the time a rumor had been floating around that if you beat Adam Corn in swiss that at some point later someone you didnt know was going to come around and “accidentally” spill water on your deck, thus more or less ruining it. A friend of mine actually faced corn at one point during the day and breathed a sigh of relief that he had actually LOST the round!! To this day I’ve NEVER heard that rumor about Adam Corn ever again nor did my friend really know where they heard it from. Though i think considering all the chatter about Peter I may have to take this as truth….which is rather sad.
NOW, as for Gadgets. They have always been a viable deck and the latest theme deck just supported them even more. Its not like this is a surprise that they topped a tournament (despite who was running them) and its not like he was the ONLY gadget player to make it a good distance into the tournament. Granted his win does taint a few ideas and may cause Konami to look at things rather differently when it comes to their decisions.
However there are a few things Konami could do in order to help prevent these problems from occuring. Firstly I have no understanding of how ban lists are put into place. I realize that this may be from just some number cruncher going “oh everyone is playing card XXXX and its making HUGE swings in gameplay…better limit/ban that card” or if there is actual thought put into the strategies involved with everything. I’m hoping its the latter but still theres more to be done.
We spend a solid 6 month time frame using one list then switching off to another but somewhere along the line (usually 4 – 5 months in) there is a large enough outcry over one deck being overpowered or one card that swings games. It would be best for Konami to change their strategy on the ban list. If we do keep going with a 6 month format they least they could do is half way through it look at the cards that are currently out and make revisions to the list.
I am currently an X-saber player and i say this with no hesitation….Darksoul is overpowered and needs semi/limiting as soon as possible. His effect and how quickly Sabers can dig him up is nothing short of a powered down draw engine with almost infinite reuse thanks to cards like Faltroul, Gottoms Emergency Call, and XX-Saber Raigugura. (sorry it late and i dont feel like spelling his name properly).
Im not saying other Saber cards arent powerful 2 but at least they have limiting restrictions….like Faultroll needing 2 Sabers on the field….Emmersblade having to be destroyed by battle. Darksoul only needs to see the field and his effect is automatic….hell there another card like that that EVERYONE loves…whats his name…oh yeah SANGAN!! I’m just saying if they are gonna make a card like this they could sorta see this thing coming a mile off and make proper adjustments. I’m not saying that Infernities are in any way balanced however I dont know them as well as i do X-sabers so i wont comment.
Ahh imagine a perfect world, where all the cards were balanced and every archtype was competitive… of course as you say its very hard to see the impact many cards will have on the meta game before they are released. we can live in hope though.
dont get me wrong yu gi is a great game and i love competitive play, but some of my favourite games have been against those with purely creative decks ment for nothing more than to summon a players favourite card or run a certain archtype.
creativity vs skill, its a fine balance
I agree with Jae here.
However, while Infernities and Sabers are very good, I really don’t think they’ve reached the level Tele-DAD did, and certainly not Dark Armed Dragon Return – in both formats, nothing else was basically capable of winning consistently. You CAN play a deck that beats Infernities and Sabers. Gladiator Beasts are actually a really good pick now, given the relative lack of defensive stuff, reliance on monster effects and consequent effectiveness of Chariot. In fact, I’m incredibly surprised that no-one’s maining three.
I think the problem with Infernities is that people REALLY need to get their sides down and perfect – what you side is just as crucial as what you main, if not more so, because you’re only playing one game a match with your main whereas Infernities are playing at least one game with most of their side. The timing of the YCS didn’t give even the ‘pro’ players time to do this, as Jae attested in his report.
I can’t help comparing the Gadget victory to Samurai winning at Houston at the beginning of the DAD Return format. Jon Moore’s victory wasn’t as dubious as Cheng’s, but a smart player made a good metagame call (Shien raped that format) and got pretty lucky. Also, DAD Return builds at that event were not yet refined, and the monster that was WangDAD was not yet discovered. Expect Infernities and Sabers to top more and more as the format goes on.
I think it’s way too early to start talking about a banlist, since the brokenness is certainly no worse than in the Tele-DAD format and there’s certainly more diversity – an emergency banlist is extremely unlikely so we’re going to have to look again at the end of August and see what needs to be done. It’s too early to make calls about what’s broken and what isn’t.
I think perhaps instead of sticking with the normal 6 month format and then making emergency lists halfway through, Konami should instead simply move to a 3 month format. This way it will be much harder for one deck type or another to become dominant, and we will some actual creativity in deck building rather than the current trend of waiting to see the top lists from a major event and then just netdecking that deck. A 3 month format may also help to balance out card values in the secondary market, the value of certain cards being a major factor in the deck building choice of the general player field.
I actually thought that this format was pretty balanced. There are many decks that can top/win and I thought that YCS just proved that. I may not be a yugioh expert like you Jae, but from my personal playing knowledge and my locals/regionals, it looks like there are at least 6 top decks and none of those are truely overpowered.
Infernities
X-sabers
Frog monarchs
Machina gadgets
Gladiator beasts
Blackwings
I’m just tired of people claiming that Infernities aren’t amazing. Maybe they aren’t perfect, but they have sheer power and it’s not okay for someone to say they aren’t good just because they didnt win their inaugural event. So what if the didn’t win? They sure as hell topped. After all, how many brand-new decks just go out and win a major tournament, anyways? I’m very proud of them for having made the finals. People who say Infernities aren’t strong are either stupid, in denial, have been exposed to the wrong match coverage, or are simply very schematic, trying to lower the hype so as to make the cards easier to obtain personally.
I understand the idea that Peter Cheng is a reputed cheater, but does nobody feel like Gadgets are viable at all? I play Stun Gadget pretty well, but it seems in this format nobody gives them credit for being almost, if not actually Tier 1. BTW, love the blog Jae, keep it up man!
@Lordinvishil: As far as I can tell, know one here has said anything negative about infernities.
@MrFury559: No one is saying gadgets are bad, just the build Cheng used.
Nobody gives CaliberCat credit as well.
Topped 2 jumps in a row though probably only Blake/Herrera/Spicer was playing it.
[...] Quick Hit: The Fallout from the Yu-Gi-Oh! Championship Series [...]
Konami doesn’t base their ban list on ‘exceptions’ like these. Yes, Gadgets winning a tournament would usually make me very happy, but despite not knowing anything about the player’s background, I did see that this was an exception that would not occur consistently in this format. Anyway, just look at how late Konami took action against DAD Return, Gladial format and Tele-DAD. It took way too long compared to how consistently those decks used to win.
My predictions are that Infernities will continue to rise while Sabers will lose the wide attention. Also Frog Emperor will rise and, when we have all the pieces, SubstiLoop as well.
@JasonMB: I play “X-Sabers” as well,however, “XX-Saber Darksoul” is not overpowered. It is indeed a good card, but not overpowered. The only way to access it from the Deck are “Rescue Cat”, another “XX-Saber Darksoul”, “Giant Rat”, “XX-Saber Emmersblade”, and “Sangan”, two of which are limited. The second problem is that it leaves “Mind Crush” and “Trap Dustshoot” very potent plays; You search for “XX-Saber Faultroll”, now you lose it to “Trap Dustshoot”/”Mind Crush”. Another problem is that it drains the Deck of monsters rather quickly, which creates a log jam in your hand and on the field. “XX-Saber Faultroll”, “Gottoms’ Emergency Call”, “XX-Saber Fulhelmknight” and “XX-Saber Ragigura” can access him easily, but there are often better plays with those cards. “XX-Saber Darksoul” is fine Unlimited, mostly because running 3 of them can create a mass log jam loaded with dead plays.
“Infernity” are a strong Deck, but they are OTK dependent. It’s one thing to access an OTK, but it’s another when it’s your Deck’s win condition. “Gladiator Beats” have a good matchup against “Infernity” because of “Waboku” and “Gladiator Beast War Chariot”. “Thunder King Rai-Oh” is also another card that gives them a good matchup because it has more base ATK than any card normally run in an “Infernity” build. It stops multi-”Infernity Launcher” searches, and allows the “Gladiator” player to consistently attack. “D.D. Crow” and “Consecrated Light” also give “Infernity” players probelms, as all monsters in the Deck are DARK, and the Deck is very graveyard dependent.
“Machina Gadgets” is probably the most difficult to side against because of limited options. You can use “System Down”, which is probably the best option, or you can follow the cries of “Commit 1 slot in your Extra Deck or Side Deck to ‘Chimeratech Fortress Dragon’”, which likely means you need to also commit another slot to a “Cyber Dragon”, which can be dead in many Decks, very easily.
There was a lot of “news” and talk about “Infernities” before and leading up to their release, so the “There was no time to study them to properly Side Deck” excuse won’t work. We got to watch them work in the OCG, and even though we don’t have “Trishula, Dragon of the Ice Barrier”, the TCG substitute is “Mist Wurm”, the only TCG-exclusive we got that you needed to watch out for was “Infernity Barrier”, which isn’t a game breaker or Deck changer.
Knowing the foundation of a Deck and its key functions allows you to Side Deck properly. Seeing them in play only helps you choose the timing for making such counter plays.