Skip to Content

Yu-Gi-Oh! Flaws

20 replies [Last post]
questccg
questccg's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011

A fellow game designer (larienna) has pointed out to me that Yu-Gi-Oh! has a serious flaw (design-wise): the player with the strongest creature in the deck will win.

Secondly there is absolutly no reason to have creatures level 1-3 in your deck. Only level 4 creatures - since all of these cost nothing to put in play.

The betting system proposed (as in each chip is a creature) corrects the Yu-Gi-Oh! flaws. How? Well first of all, having the strongest creature does not mean you can summon the MOST of this creature. Typically the stronger the creature, the more rare it will be and therefore the less you may summon of it. But that doesn't mean you can't BLUFF with a pet rock... ;)

A strong creature can be defeated by a mob of munchkins (or fairies - if you prefer)! Again this because the conflict resolution mechanism takes into account the strength of the creature and the number of creatures summoned.

Mathematically I THINK it is possible to average the number of creatures and their strength to determine a KEY value. That KEY value should indicate, based on the strength of a creature, how many copies of that creature may be summoned.

Is someone good with math, to help dig out some sort of formula (I'm pretty sure there is a relationship - and math that will work with it)?

whoshim
Offline
Joined: 05/02/2011
No exactly right

There are non-creature cards in Yu-gi-oh. There are also flip creatures. I play a deck that uses 50% non-creature, 50% creature, with the creatures being broken into 50% 4 star and 50% flip. The flip cards I use are ones that destroy the opponent's lowest power creature (if they play >4 star, then they usually only have 1 creature at a time), etc. There are many ways to get around it. It is like Magic, though less complex. There are multiple paths to victory other than just biggest creature.

Concerning your question, what are the high and low values you are using? 0-9, or 100-1000 or what? The KEY value can be found mathematically I suppose, but playtesting will refine whatever numbers you get through the formula you use. If you use math to do it, and don't have many variables, then the 'right' cards to play will become evident quickly. That is why playtesting will cause you to refine some of the numbers. The more variables you have, the less able you will be to use a formula, and the more playtesting you will have to do. This will also mean that the game is more difficult to break.

Basically, if a formula is used to determine the KEY values, you will still have to mess with the numbers or it probably won't be much of a game.

questccg
questccg's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
Right on one point...

whoshim wrote:
with the creatures being broken into 50% 4 star and 50% flip.

Well he was right about not having any creatures less than 4. He didn't say that the other player ALWAYS wins - you could beat the opponent before he gets to play his most powerful card.

He only said, that in most cases when that card is played, that player will win the dual.

larienna
larienna's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/28/2008
It's not impossible to defeat

It's not impossible to defeat the very powerful creature, it's it just very hard. You need to have and draw the right cards.

The advantage in duel masters is that even if you have a creature that has a strength of 10 000 000, the goal of the game is not to destroy creatures but to destroy enemy shields. A shield is destroyed if any creature (what ever the strength) attack the opposing player. 6 attack is required to kill a player.

So even if you have a very strong creature, yes that creature is going to kill any of my creature. But if I I have always more creature in play, the other creature that did not get killed will attack you and defeat you.

2nd important details, only creatures with the "Blocker" special ability in duel masters can block another creature. Of if you have no blockers, it will still be possible to win against and invincible creature. If you have a really strong blocker, each blocker can only block 1 creature at a time. So you generally flood attack with many small creature, since the player will not block them all.

Yes, there is no reason to have a 1-3 star creature unless it has a flip ability. Yugioh, especially in the story, strongly promotes the idea of: the more money and more experienced you are, the better will be your cards. Only less experienced or poorer player will have lvl 1-3 star cards in their deck.

While in DM, like MTG, everything has a cost. You generally want a variety of cheap and hight cost creature. You pay for what you get.

Tenelen
Tenelen's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/13/2011
I don't really play Yu-Gi-Oh

I don't really play Yu-Gi-Oh at all, but wouldn't it make sense that the player with the strongest creature will win a duel?

Dralius
Dralius's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/26/2008
$$$

questccg wrote:
(design-wise): the player with the strongest creature in the deck will win.

yes as a game that is flawed but as a way to get players to buy hundreds of dollers woth of cards to get a rare powerful creature it is perfect.

larienna
larienna's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/28/2008
Quote:I don't really play

Quote:
I don't really play Yu-Gi-Oh at all, but wouldn't it make sense that the player with the strongest creature will win a duel?

If I know that your strongest creature is stronger than mine, why should I play against you when I know that I am going to lose.

Like Dralius said, it is really an reason to force players to buy more cards and throw to garbage the weak cards because they are simply useless.

While in other games like Magic, strong cards have high cost which you might not always be able to afford to play during a game. So you need weaker low cost creature, especially at the beginning of the game, when you have little mana.

Tenelen
Tenelen's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/13/2011
Oh; I've gotcha. I was

Oh; I've gotcha. I was reading something wrong.

Well yeah....why would you? Seems like Yu-Gi-Oh is pretty much a 'the winner has more money/better cards' kind of game.

whoshim
Offline
Joined: 05/02/2011
True

Yu-gi-oh, Magic, and other collectible card games are won by whoever has the more expensive deck/more rares/etc. most of the time.

It is only in some of the newer games, like Game of Thrones LCG (Living Card Game), with a fixed distribution method, that this problem is avoided. (The Game of Thrones LCG used to be a CCG like Magic, but they changed their methods up, and release small fixed sets that you only have to buy 1 of to get 3x of each card in the set [though I think they recently made it so that you have to buy 3x to get 3x, but the principle is still the same]).

Ludomancer
Ludomancer's picture
Offline
Joined: 06/25/2011
Anime marketing

I've found Yu-gi-oh to have several major flaws, such as 'I win now' combos in every set, and the aforementioned Biggest Creature Wins law. It's too bad, because I always love a good creature-combat card game.

My theory is that YGO is only as popular as it is because it had its own weekly anime. The only other card game that has marketing this powerful is Pokemon, which is also a sales juggernaut.

CCGs are weak to the rare-chasing flaw, because when you include very rare and very powerful Rares, players will go to any lengths (i.e. pay lots of money) to get their hands on them. When the game owners succumb to this easy-money temptation, the game becomes flawed.

This is why I'm enjoying the digital MtG Planeswalker games (on Steam or all consoles): You get more or less balanced decks without buying random packs or Magic cards, which I'll never do again.

If you guys want to see a CCG that does NOT fall into the rare-chasing rabbit hole, check out Star Chamber: http://starchamber.station.sony.com/
WARNING: High learning curve and small community, but super addictive.

larienna
larienna's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/28/2008
Quote:Yu-gi-oh, Magic, and

Quote:
Yu-gi-oh, Magic, and other collectible card games are won by whoever has the more expensive deck/more rares/etc. most of the time.

In MTG, I think it could be possible to win with a deck only made of common cards because rarety is not leveled to the power of the card. I don't says that the odds would be 50/50 vs a rich player, but at least 30/70. Yu-gi-Oh is the complete opposite, you need the best cards to win. And once you have them, you are invincible.

BY the ways, I read the stories of Yu-Gi-Oh and I should say that the first dozen of book is interesting even if it could be cheezy and repetitive. Yu-Gi-Oh stands for "Master of games". And in the first part of the story, the cards is only 1 of the game that gets played. So there are a few other coll game ideas in there.

The problem is that the author of Yu-Gi-Oh is not a game designer, so he does not create games which are actually playable in real life, but it works in a fantasy novel. Still, the marketting team tried to take the game as in the book and try to make a game out of it, and it has given a not very solid game.

Quote:
Seems like Yu-Gi-Oh is pretty much a 'the winner has more money/better cards' kind of game.

It's even worst, there is a strong run away leader syndrome in this game. The way the rules are designed, when you are winning, you can bring more creatures into play to win even more.

Quote:
This is why I'm enjoying the digital MtG Planeswalker games (on Steam or all consoles)

I tried it, but I was not very tempted to play. The games are somewhat long to resolve. I might agree that the balance of the game might be less compromised than the online game because it use a set of cards of it's own. I played the old PC game, which was nice because it was an adventure game and you had the feeling of collecting cards. But the new game is just a series of duels, it's not as exciting. Apparently, you could not configure your deck of cards in the first game. But it seems possible to do it in the 2nd game.

Quote:
It's too bad, because I always love a good creature-combat card game.

Try Duel Masters, apparently, it's the number 1 CCG in Japan. There are 3 game Boy Advance games and 1 PS2 game, the easiest way to play would be to get these. I suggest you get the last GBA game, I think it is called "Shadow of the code". DM is not perfect, but it's very good.

Once the WOTC CCG patent will end (apparently near 2014-2015) I will probably make a PnP CCG similar to DM. In fact, I intend to do a DCG (Designable Card Game) where all abilities will have a price and players will be able to create their own cards.

whoshim
Offline
Joined: 05/02/2011
MTG

In MTG, there are bad rares. However, all the best cards are rare. There are even cards which are strictly better than other cards - the better ones being rare, the worse ones being common. For instance, in a recent block, there is a creature that costs 6 generic mana, is a 4/4, and can sometimes be a 6/6. It is a common. There is a rare for 6 generic, is a 6/6, has deathtouch and lifelink, and when it dies, it becomes 2 3/3s, one with deathtouch, and one with lifelink. It is mythic rare (a new rarity made up by WotC to make even more overpowered cards). (http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=213815 and http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=207875). There are many other examples of this (Serra Angel and Baneslayer Angel, Air Elemental and Djinn of Wishes, etc.).

It is possible to win with commons against rares, if the other player is playing with a poorly designed deck. However, all the best decks in standard MTG use mythic rares as the linchpins of the decks (they do utilize other cards, but these are less critical).

lapidation
lapidation's picture
Offline
Joined: 08/06/2011
I disagree.

Yu-Gi-Oh isn't the best designed game for sure, but it hardly suffers from a "biggest-monster-wins" syndrome. It used to suffer from that when the first set of packs came out, and there wan't a strong variety in the cards, but now, it's almost irrelevant who has the biggest attack. Yu-Gi-Oh will always come down to the better built deck though (if both players are competent), but not necessarily the more expensive deck.

In almost every Yu-Gi-Oh deck, there are cards to pump up monsters, cards to stop attacks, cards to destroy cards, and more. A really big attack means relatively little if you can't defend against an opponent's traps. And there are enough strategies in the game that big monsters is often times doesn't matter. I used to play in tournaments, and I played a deck with 1 monster, 1 trap, and the rest of the deck was magic cards. It won a lot too.

Something Yu-Gi-Oh has that a game like Magic doesn't is variety. All magic the gathering decks are limited by the scopes of the effects, which are all more or less similar to older cards. While in Yu-Gi-Oh, the types of decks increase every time a new series of packs come out. There are so many possible strategies to find and play, many involve attacking with big attack points, many don't. Another benefit of Yu-Gi-Oh over Magic, is that Yu-Gi-Oh will release ultra rare cards as commons. You can make a very good Yu-Gi-Oh deck without spending too much money.

There are motivations to use level 1-3 monsters in the game too, but mostly for certain types of decks. Often times, the low level monsters have the effect you need, or there is even a type of deck based on only having low level monsters. And now, with new syncro summoning, decks are full of low level monsters because they need to add the levels of their sacrifices to the level of the syncro monsters exactly. Actually, right now, there are less issues with only using level 1-3 monsters, and more about using monsters without effects. There are enough cards with enough awesome effects, that non effect monsters become more or less useless unless their attack and defense are truly ridiculous.

And your proposed additions don't really fit into the game. Honestly, I don't think you should propose changes to a game you haven't played in 8 years, or possibly never played at all. Yu-Gi-Oh has never been about numbers, you're limited to 5 monsters out at a time. And if you were able to summon multiples of a creature, just to balance out weaker creatures (who already have a place in the game), that wouldn't even be fair because you only get 6 cards to start off with.

The metagame of Yu-Gi-Oh is actually quite appealing too. Knowing the types of decks your opponents are playing, and adjusting your own deck, and your side-deck to fit is an awfully fun thing to do. And once you know the type of deck an opponent runs, you can generally guess a lot of the scariest cards to look out for and prepare for. The game gets much deeper than biggest attack wins.

JaffetC
JaffetC's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/19/2011
Agrees with previous poster

lapidation wrote:
...The metagame of Yu-Gi-Oh is actually quite appealing too. Knowing the types of decks your opponents are playing, and adjusting your own deck, and your side-deck to fit is an awfully fun thing to do. And once you know the type of deck an opponent runs, you can generally guess a lot of the scariest cards to look out for and prepare for. The game gets much deeper than biggest attack wins.

I have to agree with the person before me, most combat based games tend to have fat creatures in order to turn the tide of combat. Often these fat creatures makes it so that you now have some edge vs the opponent. However if you really want to discuss a game about creatures then lets talk about Cardfight! Vanguard. That game has literally 50 card decks of pure creatures. no events, sorcery, etc... all creature, its as simple as you can get, however the design of the game has other parts that make the game very intuitive.

First - Damage zone. When you take 6 damage you lose the game. However, in order to activate Counter blast Abilities you need to have had taken damage.

Secondly - Triggers. Heal, Critical, Draw, and Stand Triggers. Each of these only function as you attack and you check for a "drive" trigger. So when your Vanguard attacks the Vanguard you get the chance of acquiring extra cards.

Thirdly - Boost, Inercept, and Twindrive - Each level 0-1, 2, and 3 have their own set of on the card abilities. level 3's all have Twin Drive. So based on your assumption with yugioh that the fattest creature always win, we can assume that a deck packed with Lv 3 characters will win you the game. However becuase the game works on a level order you must ride from a level 2. and a level 2 must ride from a level 1 and a level 1 from a 0. So mathematically you deck will consist of enough level 1,2, and finally level 3 characters that no you will not have just level 3's and expect to win the game. Mathematically there is the possibility that you can lose by the time you have your level 2 character in play.

overall, I believe that being narrow minded is more of a flaw than the flaws that Yu-Gi-Oh! has. if you want to point out flaws, lets talk about bad themes, sets, creature abilities, etc... not Big boy wins games. Because even that isnt the entire truth about the game.

If we are to say that the first player that gets the big creature wins, wouldn't games like chess have been burned a long time ago? The player that plays white gets the first move. so they are more likely to get the bigger piece first. two Queens later and they won right? but then again we all know that, that isnt the case. It all comes down to strategy and how adept the player is in the game. :)

larienna
larienna's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/28/2008
according to BGG

according to BGG description

Quote:
It was created in collaboration between Akira Itō (Yu-Gi-Oh! R), Satoshi Nakamura (Duel Masters), and Bushiroad president Takaaki Kidani.

It looks cool, because my favorite CCG is Duel Masters. I would be curious to see what they did in this game. Unfortunately, it only seems available in Japan.

I am also less interested by collectible card games now.

MOON-E
Offline
Joined: 08/29/2011
Formats?

I'm not too into Yu-Gi-Oh, but I was wondering, what kinds of formats exist?

The reason I ask is because Magic has a format called "limited", where you play with booster packs you're given. This format completely circumvents the money issue. Booster drafts also ensure that your card pool ends up being based on skill, not just luck.

Also, I find that casual games are usually based around deck CONSTRUCTION, not deck contents. For instance, one of my decks is made up of only commons and uncommons, but it can beat my friends decks made up of rares easily because it's got more synergy and uses a strategy that his deck is not well equipped to deal with.

TBH, the "money" problem only really exists when A) you're playing competitively, or B) your casual friends care about winning. In my play group, we enjoy building decks to suit our play styles or based around a few cards we get out of booster packs. If we wanted to, we could spend all of our money buying rares and throwing them at each other, but for us it's more fun to build decks ourselves. If all your friends care about is winning, then you may have a problem...

larienna
larienna's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/28/2008
I think MTG is the only game

I think MTG is the only game who has expanded so much to require making deck formats as restrictions. In fact, I personally never understood and used them. I don't play MTG anymore.

JaffetC
JaffetC's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/19/2011
larienna wrote:I think MTG is

larienna wrote:
I think MTG is the only game who has expanded so much to require making deck formats as restrictions. In fact, I personally never understood and used them. I don't play MTG anymore.

Formats are ment to create different gaming environments. Extended decks are different from Modern, however Standard decks and Extended decks seem to be more of Current Trend Vs. Old Trend. While Modern, Legacy and Vintage have completely different deck styles.

vintage being combo heavy, and legacy a bit mid range and Modern is going to be more aggressive according to what Wizo' is currently warping the format into. (no win by turn 4. but okay if you win on turn 5.)

MOON-E
Offline
Joined: 08/29/2011
MTG is split into two main

MTG is split into two main groups: limited and constructed. Constructed takes up the majority of play, and is any type of game in which players build a deck out of their own cards. Within constructed, different formats allow for different sets to be played. (I'm assuming most TCG use the same "set" release system)

Limited, on the other hand, involves opening booster packs from a particular set and drafting them, building a deck out of only those cards. This is the format where money has no weight, since everyone has an equal chance to get certain cards (though it is a bit more luck based.)

ibot
ibot's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/19/2011
Second post

I play competitive Yu-Gi-Oh, and it is a terrible game. It's very fun, but also very bad. The R&D department is either non-existent or highly idiotic. They continually release cards that are either unplayable or completely game-breaking. Here are the basic reasons that caused the game to spiral out of control:

You can only Normal Summon (play) a monster card once per turn. This is a costless act if the monster has a Level of 4 or lower. You can immediately attack or activate the effect(s) of this monsters. See the problem yet?

You may Special Summon monsters an unlimited amount of times per turn. When the game first came out, cards allowed you to Special Summoned only two or three times PER GAME. Now, it is around two or three times PER TURN.

Every new card that comes out pushes the limits of what a Level 4 monster can do. Lately, Level 4s are receiving abilities that should be on a monster of a much higher Level.

Going first has basically no downside.

Cards of high Levels are becoming easier and easier to summon.

Many decks require no skill to pilot. This is the worst thing.

larienna
larienna's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/28/2008
Me and my friend were joking

Me and my friend were joking and we said that on the yu-gi-oh project, the only team that was working is the marketting team. All the other teams are on permanent vacations.

Syndicate content


forum | by Dr. Radut