A way to deal with decks having 25% traps

[CronoBlaze]

Back in the days of Traditional, you were considered a scrub if you ran anything MORE than 6 traps (Mirror, Ring, Call, Imperial, and two Torrential). Nowadays, decks are running as much as 10-12 traps, which is crazy. The game is also more dependant on 1 for 1 removal than anything else. Thus, my proposition.

~~~Semi-limit Jinzo~~~

I believe if this happened, and decks ran two Jinzo, the number of traps used in the average deck would decrease dramatically. I know for a fact I'd run both Jinoz if I could. Debates about 2x Mobius vs 2x Jinzo would be created, and there would be yet another type of deck (negation) to be run.

No, not EVERYONE would run two Jinzo, or even one for that matter. Tributes are still slow no matter how it's put. I'm just saying it could be interesting....

Thoughts? Discuss ^_^

[topspin1617]

We already have Decree at 3 and a Jinzo, what more could you need?

And if that ISN'T enough, there's still Heavy Storm, MST, Dust Tornado x 3, and Nobleman of Extermination.

[mech-hound]

Hmmm...

not a bad idea

I support it.

[TheMysticOne-LV4]

a magical little trap found in SD5 called royal decree would also work
as would a trap lineup of
2 dust tornado
2 royal decree
1 torrential tribute
1 call of the haunted

decree wins, jinzo phales
trap > tribute

[Paladinseer007]

We already have Decree at 3 and a Jinzo, what more could you need?

And if that ISN'T enough, there's still Heavy Storm, MST, Dust Tornado x 3, and Nobleman of Extermination.

I agree with with this, but another jinzo would be pushing things a bit too far if UDE went that route. :)

[Faust_8]

Back in the days of Traditional, you were considered a scrub if you ran anything MORE than 6 traps (Mirror, Ring, Call, Imperial, and two Torrential). Nowadays, decks are running as much as 10-12 traps, which is crazy. The game is also more dependant on 1 for 1 removal than anything else. Thus, my proposition.

How, exactly, is running 10-12 Traps a bad thing? I'm not talking strategy-wise, but how is it a such a problem that you would propose Semi-Limiting Jinzo to control it? You're acting like running a lot of Traps is hurting the game...

If people run 10-12 Traps, let 'em. It's their own decision, and it's not even a very good one if you ask me.

[The Catalyst]

Back in the days of Traditional, you were considered a scrub if you ran anything MORE than 6 traps (Mirror, Ring, Call, Imperial, and two Torrential). Nowadays, decks are running as much as 10-12 traps, which is crazy.
It is commonly accepted as crazy. Looking at decklists that win... I'm not seeing more than 9 traps. And that's assuming a 3 Sak, 3 Widespread, Call, Torrential, BTH lineup. Which is still somewhat outlandish.

If people run 10-12 Traps, let 'em. It's their own decision, and it's not even a very good one if you ask me.
This statement, for the general idea, is true. But let the record stand that any deck based on stall cards is hard pressed NOT to have double-digit traps. Since 2x Gravity Bind leaves you a decent 8 spaces... that should be filled with protection for said stall. So in some cases, it can be a good idea. But not for the CC-playing card-slinger.

[horus'masta]

wtf is the point in opressing our trap lineup? this is stupid.

[PMasterS]

Besides its too much, royal decree not having a field presence allows for the other player to not require traps, but if Jinzo was at 2 its like activating royal decree and recursing mobius at once, with the ability to do this twice not counting recursion people would shy away from traps too much, or just run solem judgement whichever was easier.

[Dragon-Knight]

We already have Decree at 3 and a Jinzo, what more could you need?

And if that ISN'T enough, there's still Heavy Storm, MST, Dust Tornado x 3, and Nobleman of Extermination.

And if those isn't enough, there's more, Trap Jammer, Cursed Seal Of The Forbidden Spell, Magic Drain and Magic Jammer.

[topspin1617]

Cursed Seal Of The Forbidden Spell, Magic Drain and Magic Jammer.

HOW do those help against decks with many traps?

[Abisal]

So... are you saying we need Jinzo at 2 because you don't like decks running 1/4 traps because of the way things used to work in traditional?

[Pemolis]

The way to deal with decks having 10 or more traps is to BAN the 10 traps ALL OF THEM ARE USING.

They are all the same exact trap lineups.

Call
Torrential
Sakuesku
Bottomless
Dust Tornado


Thats IT!!!

What you need is to ban those cards, and decks will move on to using different traps. Thats how you deal with the 1 for 1.

[TheMysticOne-LV4]

wow, that's all im hearing from people
"i dont like ____ card(s), heres a logical way to stop it"
you could do that, but that requires thinking, lets ban them even though they're not ban worthy

[BlueRabbitKing]

I agree Jinzo needs to be semi limited

[bowser100]

I agree Jinzo needs to be semi limited

You necromancing fiend!

You won't get away with this!

[Saifullah]

I agree Jinzo needs to be semi limited





Jinzo to 1

[HarleyThomas]

Ban Jinzo. Walking Decree is OP.

[kazu]

Ban Jowgen the Spiritualist. Jinzo was at 1 when Decree was at 3. Jowgen is at 3 when Oppression is at 0.

!!!

[amn89]

Lol Jinzo needs to go to 1 or 0.it's a walking Royal Decree .so op.
Also ,what a necrobump!!

[WinstonShnozwick]

Wow funny how the game changes. People used to find Jinzo bannable..

[Mort1337]

This thread is interesting...

[magic]

Jinzo was quite hot for it's time.

back then you needed a fissure or a Summoned Skull to kill it

[kazu]

Or just Zaborg (or one-for-one against another monarch).

[BlueRabbitKing]

Lol me and my friends made decks with only old cards and i remembered jinzos badassery

I like to prowl in those 2005 threads,

[magic]

when Jinzo first hit (and was limited) monarchs were not out.

Jinzo was the first bad-arse boss monster... and only the rich kids had one.

[THUNDERMAN2067]

MST and heavy?