Putting counters on cards is common in most competitive trading card games, e.g. YuGiOh and Magic: The Gathering. Placing counters on cards has long been adopted by YuGiOh players at various levels and in almost every metagame.

This post highlights some issues which are being overlooked regarding placing counters on cards in YuGiOh.

To begin with, a common misconception has to be addressed. It is the difference between counters and tokens. Players use these terms interchangeably which sometimes lead to unnecessary misunderstanding in the game.

(Source: Official Rule Book)

Counters
- Markers that are required to place on some cards to keep track of things like the number of turns, or a card’s power level. Small objects like glass beads can be put on these face up cards as counters.

Monster Tokens
-  Tokens are used to represent monsters that are created by card effects. Any object used for a token needs to have two distinct ways to place it that can clearly indicate the monster’s battle position.

After understanding what counters are in YuGiOh’s context, let’s move on to the basic ruling for counters.

(Source: Official Rule Book)

You may need to place these [counters] on cards for some card effects. You cannot place counters unless a card effect allows it.

This post revolves around the second sentence, “You cannot place counters unless a card effect allows it”.

This leads to the next question, how do we know if a card allows you to place counter(s) on it? It is usually clearly stated on the card, and often include the type of counters. E.g. Spell Counter or Clock Counter.

For example, Breaker the Magical Warrior‘s effect allows Spell Counter to be put on it, and the maximum of counters can be placed on it is stated as well (Max. 1). At the same time, the type of the counters is specific, and for this case – Spell Counters. One can use Apprentice Magician to place a Spell Counter on it, but not on a monster card which does not state that it can carry a counter, for e.g. D.D. Warrior Lady.

If a card does not state anything about placing counters on it, then no counters should be allowed to be placed on it. The above points are simple and easy to understand. There is a clear right or wrong.

After much reference to the rules on counters, the core of this post is about placing counters on cards for the purpose of marking a gamestate. In this case, “marking a gamestate” is not because the effect of a card requires counters to be placed on it. For e.g., Gladiator Beast Laquari has been tagged out, and hence it gains its effect of having 2100 attack. It is a common act for players to put a counter on it to indicate that. So is it right or wrong to place counter on it?

My interpretation on the ruling regarding “not being able to place counters unless the card’s effect allows it” is that it is referring to the example I used above involving placing a counter on D.D. Warrior Lady through Apprentice Magician’s effect. Therefore, by placing a “counter” on a tagged Gladiator Beast Laquari is a form of a “marker”.

According to the above definition, these “counters” are not exactly counters in the context of YuGiOh. It is hard to judge if it is right or wrong. There is no proper documentation on this topic. (In fact, YuGiOh does not have a comprehensive documentation on many important game mechanics, e.g. implementation of different effects.)

So you may ask, what is the problem with this then?

The problem is the inconsistency on the usage of such “counters” which confuses opponent. For instance, I had come across a player who placed a counter on Legendary Six Samurai – Shi En to indicate that its negation effect has not been activated on that turn. On another day, the same player, placed a counter on Legendary Six Samurai – Shi En to indicate that it has used its effect. There is no official way to indicate and mark that effect, which makes it hard to judge the above example. However, the bottom line is that it is down to the individual to remember and understand the current gamestate. Then is it alright to confuse the opponent with such gamestate mechanics?

I had lost a match because of such inconsistency issue years ago. In the third duel, I declared attack with my Caius the Shadow Monarch on a Gladiator Beast Hoplomus which has been tagged out before. This move costed me the match because I allowed my opponent to tag for free and made a come back. For all three duels, we had a common understanding that placing a “counter” on a Gladiator Beast indicated that it had gained its respective Gladiator Beast effect. However, in that specific scenario there was no “counter” on it. Although understanding the gamestate is down to the individual, is it alright to knowingly or unknowingly use such gamestate mechanics to trick opponent?

It makes me wonder if there is a solution to prevent such inappropriate trick. Is it possible for one player to disallow the other player to place any form of counters on a card unless it is necessary for effects which involves counters? This argument is based on the above ruling regarding placing counters on cards only if its effect allows. However, one may also argue that those are not “counters” by definition anyway, it is just a form of “markers”. Of course, if both players have a common understanding on a specific use of “markers” for certain effects, then there should not be any issue with it. Again, it is hard to have any official reference to conclude this topic.

Share your view.

—

Dark World is currently one of the most played decks. The deck revolves around discarding Dark World cards to generate advantage.

Gemini Imp and Gravekeeper’s Watcher are two of the most common side deck cards picked against Dark World because of the discarding mechanics.

This post is about when Gemini Imp and Gravekeeper’s Watcher can be activated.

Gemini Imp

Attribute: Dark
Types: Fiend/Effect
Level: 4
ATK/DEF: 1000/1000

When a card effect controlled by your opponent is activated which would cause you to discard from your hand, by sending this card from your hand to the Graveyard, negate the activation and the effect of the card and destroy it. Then draw 1 card.

It is used to negate cards like Dark World Dealings, Card Destruction, Dragged Down into the Grave etc.

(Source: 遊戯王カードWiki)

Ｑ：《悪魔の偵察者》・《炎帝テスタロス》・《火之迦具土》・《伝説の賭博師》・《マインドクラッシュ》のそれぞれの効果にチェーンして発動できますか？ Ａ：《炎帝テスタロス》・《マインドクラッシュ》に関してはチェーンして無効にできます。（11/09/14） 　　それ以外はチェーンすることはできません。（10/08/10）

In short, Gemini Imp can be used against Mind Crush.

(Source: Official Konami FAQ)

Ｑ．「首領・ザルーグ」や「魂を削る死霊」の攻撃を受けた場合等、ダメージステップ中に「ヂェミナイ・デビル」の効果を発動させる事はできますか？また、「魂を削る死霊」に対して「ヂェミナイ・デビル」を使用する事ができた場合、「魂を削る死霊」は『効果の対象になった』とみなされ、自身の効果で破壊されるのですか？この際、「ヂェミナイ・デビル」の効果でドローする事は可能なのですか？
Ａ．ダメージステップで「ヂェミナイ・デビル」の効果を発動する事はできません。

Gemini Imp can’t be activated during damage step. When a monster attacks a face down Morphing Jar, a player cannot use Gemini Imp to negate Morphing Jar’s effect. This is because Morphing Jar’s flip effect is activated during damage step. Therefore, it may be wise not to attack a set monster of a Dark World player when you have a Gemini Imp in hand. If the Dark World player flips Morphing Jar during main phase, then you can use Gemini Imp to negate it.

In order to activate Gemini Imp’s effect, your opponent has to activate effect that causes you to discard from your hand. Therefore, Gemini Imp cannot be used against Dark World Lightning and Gate of the Dark World.

Gravekeeper’s Watcher is an interesting card, which works like Gemini Imp in some ways. It can seen in some of the Japanese deck lists, whereby they have two Gemini Imp and one Gravekeeper’s Watcher in their side decks.

Gravekeeper’s Watcher

Attribute: Dark
Types: Spellcaster/Effect
Level: 4
ATK/DEF: 1000/1000

When your opponent activates a card that includes an effect whereby your opponent discards from his/her hand, send this card from your hand to the Graveyard to negate the activation and the effect of the card and destroy it.

In comparison with Gemini Imp, Gravekeeper’s Watcher can be used to negate an effect which your opponent discards from his own hand, not yours. At first glance, Gravekeeper’s Watcher seems to be more useful as it can also negate cards that only discard from Dark World player’s hand, e.g. Gate of the Dark World (which is wrong). Since most cards that require Dark world player’s opponent to discard also require Dark World player to discard from his own hand, it negates more cards than Gemini Imp against Dark World.

(Source: Official Konami FAQ)

Ｑ.「暗黒界の門」のカードを発動した時、および表側表示で存在する「暗黒界の門」の効果を発動した時に、チェーンして自分の手札に存在する「墓守の監視者」の効果を発動する事はできますか？
Ａ．「暗黒界の門」のカードを発動した時に、チェーンして「墓守の監視者」の効果を発動する事はできません。また、「暗黒界の門」の効果を発動した時にも、チェーンして「墓守の監視者」の効果を発動する事はできません。

Gravekeeper’s Watcher cannot be used to negate the activation of Gate of the Dark World. It also cannot be used to negate the effect activation of Gate of the Dark World.

(Source: 遊戯王カードWiki)

Ｑ：《くノ一ウォリアー》・《魔轟神レイヴン》・《メタモルポット》・《リグラス・リーパー》・《暗黒界の取引》・《王家の生け贄》・《暗黒界の雷》・《手札抹殺》・《墓穴の道連れ》・《マインドクラッシュ》・《無効》・《エクストラゲート》のそれぞれの効果にチェーンして発動できますか？
Ａ：《無効》に対して発動できません。(10/07/03) 　　それ以外はダメージステップ以外ならチェーンできます。(11/08/06)

Other than, Null and Void, all the cards listed in the question can be negated by Gravekeeper’s Watcher. These include Fabled Raven, Morphing Jar, Dark World Dealings, Dark World Lightning, Dragged Down into the Grave and Mind Crush (Just to name out Dark World related cards).

(Source: Official Konami FAQ)

Ｑ．「墓守の監視者」の効果をダメージステップで発動する事はできますか？例えば、裏側表示の「メタモルポット」が攻撃された場合に、「メタモルポット」の効果にチェーンして「墓守の監視者」の効果を発動できますか？
Ａ．ダメージステップでは「墓守の監視者」の効果を発動させる事はできません。

Gravekeeper’s Watcher cannot be used during damage step.

In conclusion, both are decent against Dark World. Although Gravekeeper’s Watcher can negate a larger range of cards, I will opt for Gemini Imp because of the additional card draw effect. Below is a comparison of the list of Dark World related cards that these two cards can/cannot negate.

—

Deck used: T.G. Agent

Round 1: XOX
V.S. Machina Gadget

Round 2: OO
V.S. Grave Black Feather

Round 3: OO
V.S. Hero Beat

Round 4: OXX
V.S. Six Samurai

Result: Unknown

—

This tournament was badly organised and it was an unfair one.

First of all, they did not use any generally recognised format. The format used was not brought to notice to every participant before the commencement of the tournament. They had a “so-called swiss” format. Below is how the pairing was done:

1. The organiser prepared a pile of poker cards.
2. The cards in that pile come in pairs.
3. The organiser walked to players. One by one.
4.  Each player picked a card from the deck.
5. Players who had the “same pair” would play against each other.

Players with the same number of wins will pick cards from the same pile, which formed the “so-called swiss” format. No minor score was being captured, and there was no proper pair up/down. I assumed there was no bye given by inserting a “bye card”.

Secondly, conspiracy was seen as a common standard. I saw some players picked their cards from the pile of poker cards, and they knew the opponents that they were going to face. This was because of step 3 (as shown above), players didn’t get paired at the same time. They then placed their cards back into the pile and picked other cards to change their opponent. The organiser allowed them to do so. How ridiculous.

Thirdly, the next round’s pairing was done when there were still games going on. Their pairings had been “arranged”.

To follow up with the above point, no time limit was given for each round.

I was “randomly picked out” of the tournament after the fourth round. When the fourth round was over, players who had two wins were separated into two categories. One category contained players who won the first round and had two wins in total, while the other contained players who lost the first round and had two wins in total. Four players, including myself, did not win the first round and had two wins. The organiser then told us to pick a card each from four poker cards, whereby one of the cards was different. The person who picked that special card could carry on playing against someone who had two wins and won the first game. The other three got kicked out of the tournament, and I was one of them.

Bullshit.

Now I know why others condemn that place.

There is no fair play.

There is no proper system. (Oh yes, a corrupted one.)

Please repent.

—

Away from the above nonsense, let’s get down to something constructive.

This was what happened in the third duel of my fourth round.

I started first with,
- Mystical Shine Ball
- Mystical Shine Ball
- Agent – Earth
- T.G. Striker
- Gorz
- Master Hyperion

I summoned Agent – Earth and searched for Agent – Venus. Then I ended my turn.

Opponent placed Shien’s Dojo and Six Samurai United on the field. He then special summoned Elder of Six Samurai, and used Asceticism of the Six Samurai to summon Kagemusha of the Six Samurai. He drew two cards from Six Samurai United. He placed another Shien’s Dojo on the field before he synchro summoned LSS – Shien. He then normal summoned LSS – Kageki. Removed the first Shien’s Dojo, with four counters, to summon LSS – Kizan. Then, he removed the other Shien’s Dojo to summon LSS – Mizuho.

He used LSS – Mizuho to attack my Agent – Earth.

I would argue that it is better to attack with LSS – Shien instead. If I had Honest, he could use Shien’s effect to destroy another Six Samurai instead and it would result in least damage taken. He could have an option to follow up with LSS – Mizuho’s effect to destroy Agent – Earth. If I didn’t have Honest, but a Gorz instead. Gorz’s token would be 2100 instead of 2500, assuming the attacking sequence is in an ascending order of attack power.

I didn’t have an Honest, so he direct attacked with the rest, and LSS – Shien was the last to attack. I special summoned Gorz from my hand after LSS – Shien’s attack damage was dealt. My LP was 1100. My gorz token was 2500/2500.

He activated LSS – Mizuho’s effect by releasing LSS – Kageki and destroyed my Gorz. He then set two spell/trap and ended his turn with LSS – Shien, LSS – Kizan and LSS – Mizuho on field. He had no cards in his hand.

I drew an Agent – Earth. So I had a 2500/2500 Gorz token on the field and an Agent-Earth in my grave. My hand was,

- Mystical Shine Ball
- Mystical Shine Ball
- Agent – Earth
- T.G. Striker
- Agent – Venus
- Master Hyperion

I special summoned Master Hyperion by removing the Agent – Earth from my hand, and he used Solemn Warning on it. I then suicide attack with my Gorz token on his LSS – Shien. He used its effect and destroyed LSS – Mizuho instead. This was still within my expectation.

With no monster on my field, I special summoned T.G. Striker and normal summoned Agent – Venus. I activated Agent – Venus’s effect to special summon two Mystical Shine Ball, one from the deck and one from the hand. I synchro summoned Trishula and nothing was chained. I used Trishula’s effect to remove LSS – Mizuho from his grave and his set spell/trap, which was a MST. I ended my turn with 100 LP and a Trishula on field.

He drew a card and turned LSS – Kizan and LSS – Shien to defence position. He ended his turn.

I drew a Book of Moon. I used Trishula to attack LSS – Shien, and he used its effect to destroy LSS – Kizan instead. I then set my Mystical Shine Ball and Book of moon. I ended my turn.

He drew a card ( two cards in hand) and summoned LSS – Kageki. He used Asceticism of the Six Samurai and special summoned  LSS – Enishi. He then used LSS – Enishi’s effect on my Trishula and attacked with all of his monsters. Game over.

(Book of Moon would be negated by LSS – Shien.)

—

So, I have been thinking if there was anything that I could do differently to win the game.

Regarding removing the Agent – Earth my hand instead of the one in grave to summon Hyperion is to allow me to use Hyperion’s effect if it was successfully summoned.

I thought of removing LSS – Shien instead of the set card with my Trishula. I was worried that the set card may be a Double-Edged Sword Technique, which would allow him to special summon Kagemusha and he could win with Brionac next turn. If I removed Kagemusha in his grave stead of Mizuho, he still could kill me with DEST by summoning Mizuho. It then crossed my mind that he might side out DEST for D.D. Fissure against a T.G. Agent. However, I saw DEST in the second duel and he did not use his side deck between the second and third duel. The set card might be a Dimensional Prison, but it was less likely as nothing was chained when I attacked with my token. So I removed the set card instead and hopefully I could come back by continuously attacking with Trishula.

Ironically, what I assumed as the right move didn’t end up well. If I removed his Shien instead, and attacked his Kizan on the next turn, I would not lose the way I did. Of course, I wouldn’t know that it was a MST.

Any suggestion?

—

Participated in the 3rd round of Asia Plus 2011 pre-qualifier today with Wan Xin and Mango.

I shall not disclose the decks without their consent.

Top 16: OOO (Team result)
Leader (Me): OO (V.S. Black Feather)
Member A (Mango): OO (V.S. Machina Gadget)
Member B (Wan Xin): XOO (V.S. Lightlord)

Quarter final: OOO
Me: OO (V.S. Lightlord)
Mango: OXO (V.S. Karakuri Machina)
Wan Xin: XOO (V.S. Dark World)

Semi final: OOO
Me: XOO (V.S. T.G. Agent)
Mango: OXO (V.S. X-Saber)
Wan Xin: XOO (V.S. Karakuri)

Final: XOX
Me: XX (V.S. Gladiator Beast)
Mango: OXO (T.G. Agent)
Wan Xin: OXX (V.S. Ragia Beat)

Result: 2nd

—

Gladiator Beast is my worst match up. =(

—

A strange day.

Deck used: Six Samurai T.G. Agent

Swiss 1: BYE

Swiss 2: OXO
V.S. Machina Gadget

Swiss 3: XOX
V.S. Junk Doppel

Swiss 4: XOO
V.S. Hero Beat

Swiss 5: XOX
V.S. Agent

Quarter final: XX
V.S. Infernity

Result: Top 8 (so-called 5th)

—

Look at the number of games I won. Then, look at the result.

Strange.

I had 3-2 in swiss, with one bye, and I managed to get the 8th spot. I stood no chance against the “Perfect Infernity” in the quarter final. The other three players who lost in the quarter final wanted to share the prizes, but I refused as usual. They eventually just conceded and let me had the first pick on the prizes. So arguably I had gotten 5th.

I had actually only won two games that I had played (exclude bye), and lost three. Yet I somehow landed on 5th and walked away with something. Lucky.

Someone lost all his games and got an Inverz Roach from lucky draw. A weird day. (Yes, I’m calling you out. lol.)

It sucks when the above happens too often in tournament.

—

Monster: 23
1x Black Luster Soldier – Envoy of the Beginning
3x Master Hyperion
3x The Agent of Creation – Venus
3x The Agent of Mystery – Earth
3x Mystical Shine Ball
1x Sangan
3x T.G. Striker
3x T.G. Warwolf
1x Junk Synchron
2x Elder of the Six Samurai

Spell: 10
2x Pot of Duality
1x Heavy Storm
1x Dark Hole
1x Monster Reborn
2x MST
1x Book of Moon
1x Reinforcement of the Army
1x Mind Control

Trap: 7
1x Trap Dustshoot
1x Torrential Tribute
2x Bottomless Trap Hole
2x Solemn Warning
1x Solemn Judgment

Extra: 15
1x Gachi Gachi Gantetsu
1x Daigusto Phoenix
1x No. 17: Leviathan Dragon
1x Leviair the Sea Dragon
1x No. 30: Acid Golem of Destruction
1x Arms Aid
1x A.O.J. Catastor
1x T.G. Wonder Magician
1x T.G. Hyper Librarian
1x Legendary Six Samurai – Shi En
1x Brionac, Dragon of the Ice Barrier
1x Black Rose Dragon
1x Ancient Sacred Wyvern
1x Scrap Dragon
1x Trishula, Dragon of the Ice Barrier

—

Most Japanese players played Phoenix Wing Wind Blast in this build. I was using it the first time without testing, so I opted for stable card choices. There isn’t any Herald of Orange Light, and Phoenix Wing Wind Blast is acting as its replacement in a way. If I were to use Phoenix Wing Wind Blast, why not just max out Solemn Warning. Without Phoenix Wing Wind Blast, I definitely will play MST. Therefore, it shaped into this generic stable card choice build.

After this tournament, I believe that Phoenix Wing Wind Blast is a good choice. The deck has many ‘puzzle pieces’ for combos, e.g. Mystical Shine Ball, T.G. Striker, T.G. Warwolf and Elder of Six Samurai. Frequently, Phoenix Wing Wind Blast will come in handy since I can afford to discard one of these cards. It works well against Gantetsu too. If Phoenix Wing Wind Blast is used on a set spell or trap, and you can summon LSS-Shien or Trishula successfully, then the game is almost won. With opponent’s choice limited due to Phoenix Wing Wind Blast, it’s hard to come back.

For the Japanese players, they chose Seven Tools of Bandit and dropped Trap Dustshoot. This is largely due to their shift in metagame. Offering Gadget is the top deck in Japan now with the release of DT13. Trap Dustshoot is a dead card most of the time against Offering Gadget. Seven Tools of Bandit works decently well with this deck as it allows you to special summon cards like LSS-Shien etc. Ideally it is used against Solemn Warning.

Junk Synchron provides an addtional option for Reinforcement of the Army. It also can be used with T.G. Warwolf.

—

Mind Crush has been heavily used in the current metagame.

After I had tried it for a month or so, I dislike it.

Everyone is saying that Mind Crush is good because there are 3x Pot of Duality and other search engine cards, e.g. Agent-Earth. It sounds ideal. However, it doesn’t really gain advantage.

Type: Trap
Category: Normal

Declare 1 card name. If that card is in your opponent’s hand, they must discard all copies of it in their hand to the Graveyard. If it is not, you randomly discard 1 card.

Back to basic. Mind Crush does a one for one card trade with the opponent unless opponent has multiple copies. It is uncommon for a player to search out another copy of a card when he already has one. Assuming there’s only one copy of the named card, there isn’t an advantage gained after Mind Crush is used.

Some may argue that one can at least look at opponent’s hand and the advantage is outside basic card advantage. But you don’t exactly look at your opponent’s hand when Mind Crush resolves. There were times whereby my opponent just shows me his hand as if it’s a Trap Dustshoot when I activate Mind Crush. Probably that was the only time when I feel Mind Crush is awesome.

There were other times when my opponent used Mind Crush on me, and I just briefly showed my hand. They complain to the judge that I didn’t let them look at my hand. So I explained to the judge about the ruling and how this should resolve. The judge then asked “How ‘brief’ is your ‘briefly’?”. Well, I actually held my hand out without covering more than half of each card, and my opponent had time to move his head over and look at them. My opponent argued, “but I only saw 3 cards, XXX, YYY, ZZZ.”. Come on! That showed that I had already shown my hand longer than required. Anyway, there are many players who cover the cards before showing it to the opponent, and one can barely even see the color of the cards.

Back to topic. It is usually a one for one card trade. Mind Crush is a reactive card, because it generally requires you to know at least one card in opponent’s hand to be useful. So, it does not give card advantage, no hand information, and being reactive. It doesn’t sound that good, does it? Furthermore, it may just be a dead card when it is drawn. Let’s assume it is a side deck material card, and one will only use the card against deck that searches often. It can prevent a card from being played before it is actually played out from hand. So here is my argument, is it worthy to play a reactive card when there are other choices that can stop the key cards that are being searched out?

One example is Agent-Venus. It can be searched out by Agent-Earth and also be added to hand through Pot of Duality. These are the two main timing when you will name Agent-Venus with Mind Crush. It seems better to me that I play other traps that can stop Agent-Venus. First of all, shit can happen. Secondly, the time frame that this card can be used is very limited. Mind Crush has to be used on the turn whereby you know a card in opponent’s hand, or the next turn. It is because you will not know whether there’s another chance to use it after opponent is going to use that searched card. Thirdly, it does not exactly generate concrete advantage as I had mentioned above.

Mind Crush is more of a liability to me so far, although it is useful when played at a correct time. People always see it as “very profitable” when Mind Crush is used on a key card to stop opponent’s flow, e.g. Agent-Venus (again). But they don’t see it as a liability when it is not used.

I know people will talk about the “pro level” of using Mind Crush, namely “blind call”. It is when opponent does not review any of his cards in hand, and you guess that he has a certain card because of the way he plays. Again, one doesn’t gain concrete advantage even if he named a correct card. Other times, people tend to name a card that he may “die” from if opponent has it. Probably it is that one dead card you have that leads to the situation whereby you have to do or die. Then why play Mind Crush to begin with if it’s that unstable. I still remember a game that was played years ago, I had Dark Armed Dragon and another dark monster in hand. There were 2 dark monsters in grave, and I had a set Mind Crush. I would certainly lose the game if I don’t summon my Dark Armed Dragon on that turn. In the end, I used Mind Crush and named Blue Eyes White Dragon. Hopefully my dark monster is discarded, so that I can summon my Dark Armed Dragon. It could be less risky if Mind Crush was another stable trap like Dimensional Prison.

Mind Crush is still strong in some decks. Most Dark World decks run two Mind Crush because of Drag to the Grave, and it usually wins the game when they’re played together. They seal off the chance of opponent making a come back.

With these being said, Mind Crush is still decent. But it is certainly not as good as many assume it to be. Maybe it is just my favoritism over stability in deck building. The one thing that I like about it is that it can chain to many cards. That is the time when Mind Crush does the most damage. Other than that it is a liability.

I know many will disagree with me. I’m ready for critics.

Discuss.

—

Edit:

Apparently, the ruling has been revised recently.

It seems like one has to reveal his hand like Trap Dustshoot if the number of the named card in hand isn’t clear. Mind Crush is more useful than it was. The ability to look at the opponent’s hand is tempting, and it slightly bends my main argument in this post. “It does not generate concrete advantage after a one for one card trade.” The trade off for the risk of it being a liability is that one may look at opponent’s hand.

—

It was tiring to play two tournaments in two days.

Deck used: T.G. Agent

Swiss 1: OXO (Time out)
VS. T.G. Agent

Swiss 2: XOO (Time out)
VS. X-Saber

Swiss 3: OO
VS. Chaos Plant

Swiss 4: OXO
VS. Diva Ragia

Swiss 5: OXO
VS. Meta Beat

Quarter final: OXO
VS. Junk Doppel

Semi final: XOX
VS. Junk Doppel

3rd/4th: XOX
VS. Agent Fairy

Result: 4th

—

Monster: 24
1x Black Luster Soldier – Envoy of the Beginning
1x Gorz the Emissary of Darkness
1x Tragoedia
3x Master Hyperion
3x The Agent of Creation – Venus
3x The Agent of Mystery – Earth
3x Mystical Shine Ball
1x Honest
1x Sangan
3x T.G. Striker
2x T.G. Warwolf
1x T.G. Rhino
1x Herald of Orange Light

Spell: 12
3x Pot of Duality
1x Heavy Storm
1x Dark Hole
1x Monster Reborn
2x MST
1x Book of Moon
2x Creature Swap
1x Mind Control

Trap: 4
1x Trap Dustshoot
1x Torrential Tribute
2x Bottomless Trap Hole

Extra: 15
2x Gachi Gachi Gantetsu
1x Daigusto Phoenix
1x No. 17: Leviathan Dragon
1x Leviair the Sea Dragon
1x Arms Aid
1x A.O.J. Catastor
1x T.G. Wonder Magician
1x T.G. Hyper Librarian
1x Brionac, Dragon of the Ice Barrier
1x Naturia Balkion
1x Black Rose Dragon
1x Ancient Sacred Wyvern
1x Scrap Dragon
1x Trishula, Dragon of the Ice Barrier

—

The ratio of my T.G. Monsters is less common. Usually, there are 3x T.G. Striker and 3x T.G. Warwolf, or 2x T.G. Striker and 3x T.G. Warwolf. Some prefer to play an additional 2x T.G. Rhino and opt for TG-EM1.

I feel that the utility of T.G. Warwolf is lower than T.G. Striker. T.G. Warwolf can mainly combo with Agent-Venus or T.G. Striker under normal circumstances. Usually, I prefer not to special summon T.G. Warwolf with Agent-Venus, because it can’t provide an otk and it is unnecessary to exceed with Agent-Venus. If I’ve T.G. Striker, T.G. Warwolf and Agent-Venus together, then I will summon T.G. Wonder Magician before I summon my Agent-Venus. As for T.G. Striker, it can link better with Agent-Venus, or even with Agent-Earth for a Gantetsu. I can special summon T.G. Striker and follow up with Creature Swap or Mind Control before I normal summon my monster. These explain why I chose to have 3x T.G. Striker and 2x T.G. Warwolf, but not the other way round.

T.G. Rhino is just my preference. It is useful against typical beat down deck, e.g. Black Feather and Hero Beat. Raiou is a big threat and T.G. Rhino can kill it. Of course, it goes into the argument whereby you can’t search it out when Raiou destroy a T.G. Striker or T.G. Warwolf. However, it still provides an option instead of just typical T.G. Striker or T.G. Warwolf in other situations. For example, in swiss 4, my opponent attacks my set T.G. Warwolf with Sabersaurus and I searched T.G. Rhino. His look: Σ（ﾟдﾟlll）I had a Bottomless Trap Hole, just in case opponent summoned Jurrac Guaiba instead. T.G. Rhino can also be used to suicide with Agent-Venus when opponent has Gantetsu, then search for T.G. Striker. Special summon T.G. Striker and normal summon Agent-Venus on the next turn, then summon Trishula to remove Gantetsu. If opponent has Bottomless Trap Hole, it is very likely that he will use it on T.G. Rhino, so that he won’t lose out by one card. It is then safer to use Agent-Venus on the next turn. Personally, I’m not a fan of TG-EM1 because I find it hard to execute.

I prefer 2x Gantetsu to 2x Daigusto Phoenix. Normally, I will only use Daigusto when I can perform an otk, and I don’t need two to perform it. Some players summon Agent-Earth, then summon Agent-Venus on the next turn. (Assuming, there is no monster on opponent’s field) Then they special summon 3x Mystical Shine Ball, and exceed into 2x Daigusto Phoenix. 2x Daigusto Phoenix + 1x Agent-Venus = 7600. First of all, it runs into the risk of Gorz or Tragoedia. Secondly, opponent can deal with it next turn with just another monster that has a high enough attack. A Master Hyperion is needed to perform an otk on the second turn in this commonly seen scenario. However, when one has Master Hyperion for the otk, an Ancient Sacred Wvyern and a Daigusto Phoenix can do the job as well. Furthermore, it is more favorable if opponent has Gorz or Tragoedia. I didn’t lose in some games in this tournament because I had a second Gantetsu.

Talking about the typical Agent-Earth and search for Agent-Venus opening, below are two scenarios that happened in this tournament.

In the second duel of swiss 1, opponent started first and did this opening. I summoned Agent-Venus which was welcomed by a Solemn Warning. I had a Dark Hole, should I play it? Like I had said, with that Agent-Earth on the field and an Agent-Venus on hand, it is very possible that opponent can otk me next turn. The requirement is that he needed to have a Master Hyperion. So I took the gamble and did not use Dark Hole, and I was killed by 2x Daigusto, Agent-Venus and Master Hyperion. If I didn’t want to take the risk and used Dark Hole, I will just lose to the tempo of Agent-Venus next turn.

In the third duel of quarter final, I did this opening and used a Bottomless Trap Hole on opponent’s Lyla. He chose to use Dark Hole. I indeed had a Master Hyperion, but the Dark Hole and Agent-Earth trade was rewarding and I won the game. It is a dilemma.

One of my opponent used Effect Veiler on my Agent-Venus when I attempted to summon my first Mystical Shine Ball. Obviously, he didn’t read my post. I had one of the Mystical Shine Ball in my hand, and I was able to used Agent-Venus’s effect again next turn to summon two from deck. Nice.

—

Troll name used: Maka Prime

—

Deck used: Whirlwind Black Feather

Swiss 1: XOO
VS. Agent Fairy

Swiss 2: XOX
VS. Necrovalley Undead

Swiss 3: OO
VS. Agent Fairy

Swiss 4: XOO
VS. Ragia Rabbit

Quarter final: XOO
VS. Valhalla Agent

Semi final: OO
VS. Agent Fairy

Final: OXO
VS. Chaos Plant

Result: 1st

—

There are all sort of Agents today.

The one that I met in quarter final was interesting. There were Valhalla and Agent-Jupiter. I doubt there are any Agent-Venus and Mystical Shine Ball. I think this is an inferior build to the standard Agent Fairy.

I played BF-Jin and not BF-Vayu. Ideally, Jin is a better card when it’s drawn in hand, but Vayu is better when it’s summoned by Shura. Jin’s effect can used against Venus too. I drew Jin in my starting hand for more than half of the games, and I still can’t find a chance to use it against Venus  even when I was playing against so many Agents. Ironically, I hoped that Jin was Vayu most of the time. Zephyrus is kinda useless.

It is funny to see my opponents react by swapping in Starlight Road and I sided out Icarus Attack.

—

Monster:19
1x Dark  Armed Dragon
1x Black Luster Soldier
3x Raiou
3x BF- Shura
3x BF-Bora
1x BF-Zephyrus
1x BF-Kalut
1x BF-Gale
3x BF-Blizzard
1x BF-Jin
1x Effect Veiler

Spell: 10
1x Dark Hole
1x Monster Reborn
1x Book of Moon
3x Pot of Duality
1x Allure of Darkness
2x MST
1x Black Whirlwind

Trap: 11
3x Icarus Attack
1x Solemn Judgment
2x Solemn Warning
2x Bottomless Trap Hole
1x Torrential Tribute
1x Starlight Road
1x Trap Dustshoot

—

Troll name used: IMMvp

—

Shit day.

I wanted to use Whirlwind Black Feather but I didn’t have a card.

Deck used: Agent Fairy

Swiss 1: XOO
VS. Dark World

Swiss 2: XX
VS. D.D. Control

Swiss 3: OXX
VS. T.G. Agent

Swiss 4: OXO
VS. Hero Beat

Swiss 5: OO
VS. Machina Gadget

Result: Didn’t qualify for top 8

—

To begin with, I think I was playing with a disadvantage due to the time limit. Rather than having 40min, it was 30min. A match of 3 duels usually take about 40min. Out of the 5 games yesterday, there were 4 games whereby there was only 5min left and it was in 2nd duel. Since I was using Agent Fairy, I had Agent-Venus which worked against time in terms of time limit. Furthermore, I was playing with Solemn Judgment and Solemn Warning, so LP liability was a big problem. I was always forced to play moves that were inferior just to accommodate the 30min time limit.

Let’s say, I open with Agent-Earth and search for Agent-Venus. Opponent attacks with a monster on Earth. Then I summon Venus next turn and pay 1000 LP. Set a Solemn Warning. I’m left with around half of my LP. I couldn’t gain the advantage that I deserved with the LP invested due to time limit.

The 3rd duel against T.G. Agent in Swiss 3 was just ridiculous. I summoned Agent-Venus and used its effect, then ended my turn with a Mind Crush. Opponent summoned Agent-Earth and searched for Agent-Venus, then I activated Mind Crush and named Agent-Venus. There were Venus, Monster Reborn, Solemn Judgment, Trap Dustshoot, Solemn Warning and “I can’t remember”. He used Monster Reborn on his Venus and summoned 3x Mystical Shine Ball, then exceed summon into 2x Gachi Gachi. His Venus (2400) attacked on my Venus (2000). Next turn, he used Trap Dustshoot. The game was decided from there.

I was thinking if it was a correct decision to use Mind Crush right away. It was certain that he can only summon Venus next turn. The reason I activated Mind Crush was to ensure I had perfect information on what he had before he could set his cards. I was wondering if it was better to use it on his draw phase next turn. The trade off is that I get to see what he draws but not what he could have set on the last turn. Of course, it wouldn’t change the result in this scenario.

As for the 0-2 against the D.D. Control deck, things just don’t go my way with 2-3 Mystical Shine Ball in hand. And not drawing into any side deck cards didn’t help either.

—

Troll name used: MKP

—

Jason Larabee did a loop combo with Infernity in recent Toronto YCS.

It requires Infernity Archfiend, Infernity Necromancer and Infernity Avenger in grave. The combo loops with Infernity Mirage. It ends up with enough monsters on field to otk opponent.

Reference:
- Feature match
- Explanation

Trishula can be reused by returning it to extra deck through Brionac’s effect. Infernity Barrier can be searched through Infernity Archfiend multiple times. Once the loop is set up, it can branch out to different plays.

—