User talk:Cheesedude

Welcome to my talk page. Feel free to leave any messages below. However, do not ask me for help with your Deck. I have not actively played the TCG in a very long time, and have not kept up with current rulings. If you leave me a message, I will put your talk page on my watchlist. You may respond on my talk page or your talk page. I will check both.

Manga cards lore
Well, you know the lores of the manga cards tend to use different terms of the TCG/OCG, right? And sometimes even non-Yu-Gi-Oh! terms, like that card of Asuka's whose lore was something like "Two ice pillars appear on the field". So, in the cards' articles, should we keep the official English lore or our TCG-like lore? E.g., in the case of "Underworld Dragon Dragonecro", we should keep "This monster does not destroy enemy monsters in battle. It steals the soul of monsters it battles." or "If this card battles with an opponent's monster, that monster is not destroyed by battle. After damage calculation, that monster's ATK becomes 0. Then, Special Summon 1 "Underworld Token". The ATK of the "Underworld Token" is equal to the original ATK of the monster this card battled. If an "Underworld Token" battles with an opponent's monster, that monster is not destroyed by battle."? LegendaryAsariUgetsu (talk • contribs) 01:39, October 20, 2012 (UTC)


 * Use whatever the manga actually says. In that case, it sounds like an "Underworld Token" isn't even a thing that exists. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 09:09, October 20, 2012 (UTC)


 * Even in cases like "Two ice pillars appear on the field"? I wonder if it isn't confusing for who didn't read the manga, and that is not even a Yu-Gi-Oh! card lore. :| Although I don't think we should just ignore the actual non-sense lore of the card, so, dunno. :/ LegendaryAsariUgetsu (talk • contribs) 16:13, October 20, 2012 (UTC)

Tribute
"Tribute is the act of sending a monster from the field to the Graveyard, either for a Tribute Summon, a cost, or an effect." This is not a good definition \=, if a monster you control "destroyed" by your card, then you can't call that a "Tribute". We can only call it "Tribute" if the card said that, using this term in its text. and I mention that in the article. About "Sending" card to the Graveyard, I open a talk page about it, because I think Tribute is NOT "the act of sending" its something other than that. the sending happen as a result. --Dlamash (talk • contribs) 15:06, October 20, 2012 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure I understand what the issue is. The definition that's there does not imply that a destroyed card counts as a Tribute. It states that a Tribute can happen for a Summon, a cost or an effect. That's it. And that's true, isn't it? As for it not being the act of sending, if you have a better way to word it, by all means change it. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 18:45, October 20, 2012 (UTC)


 * If you have "Macro Cosmos" on the field, can you tribute 3 monster to summon "Destiny HERO - Plasma" ? Yes, you can. But you cannot "send" them to the Graveyard, they will banished instead. Thats why you cannot summmon "Arcana Force EX - The Light Ruler" because you cannot pay the cost of summon, the cost will not happen as no card will be sent to Graveyard. If "Tribute" = "Send" then you cannot summon Plasma too. But you can, way? In One sentence, because it's not the act of sending. Sending happens as a result of Tributing, thats way you can still Tribute as a cost to summon or to activate cards or effects even if "Macro Cosmos" is on the field. If you say "Tributing is the act of sending" anyone will think that "Tribute" is "another way of sending card to the Graveyard", and that is WRONG. Tributing is an act, it doesn't mean "Send to the Graveyard", it means "make the monster leave the field". Sending is another act happens Immediately after Tributing, it's something else, NOT the Tribute itself. --Dlamash (talk • contribs) 07:18, October 25, 2012 (UTC)


 * Yes, it does send it to the Graveyard. The only instances where its NOT is when a card effect like "Macro Cosmos" changes that. I understand what you're saying, I just don't understand how its an issue at all (and the TCG is not really my department, so if you do say its an issue, I'll believe you). If you want to change it, please try to use better grammar. That's my main issue with your changes. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 16:47, October 25, 2012 (UTC)

RE: Shark Drake Vice
Fixed. -Falzar FZ- (talk page|useful stuff) 23:12, October 20, 2012 (UTC)

Re: NAC
Unfortunately not. The site won't load at all. :/ -- The Goblin  20:57, October 21, 2012 (UTC)

Talk page message
I put a note on "Cyber Barrier Dragon's" talk page, but I need to find people that will talk on the talk page. Can you join in with the discussion. On another note, the new errata has now made it clear on the difference between 'this card can only be Special Summoned by/with' and 'this card cannot be Special Summoned except by/withCardsknower (talk • contribs) 01:42, October 22, 2012 (UTC)Cardsknower


 * I saw the topic. I didn't respond because I have no comments besides "I don't know". Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 14:18, October 22, 2012 (UTC)

Three notes
One note on "Jam Defender". After Yugi used "Lightforce Sword", "Buster Blader" went in for a counterattack, but "Jam Defender" nullified the damage. Despite this, "Slifer" was not destroyed. I would assume this was a ruling in the anime about monsters not being destroyed if Battle Damage was negated(just for Battle City). According to two episodes I just went through, it seems that a effect sometimes counts as an effect, but it appears to apply to effects that destroys monsters or effects that decrease ATK(this was in Yugi's Duel with Strings and his Duel with Yami Marik). Also after "Card of Safe Return" resolved, Strings illegally attacked twice in one turn. Under normal conditions, this can't be done unless through a card effect(unless "Slifer" has an effect that can attack more than once, this is an error). Reply when possible.Cardsknower (talk • contribs) 01:32, October 24, 2012 (UTC)Cardsknower


 * Another note I have on is the number of known Numbers Quattro had. He is supposed to have at least 10 collected Numbers which should include his "Number 88" card(the Number 32 card was given to Trey who gave it to Shark upon defeat). Vetrix took all those Numbers away after Quattro lost to Shark. However the Number card page states there are six unknown Number Cards Quattro obtained, suggesting that Number 32, Number 15, and Number 40 also count as Numbers that Quattro took from other Number holders.Cardsknower (talk • contribs) 22:16, October 24, 2012 (UTC)Cardsknower


 * There is no evidence to suggest the "Gimmick Puppet" "Numbers" were originally his. He could have gotten them from someone else and decided to switch to a "Gimmick Puppet" Deck so he could get some use out of them. Fact is, we don't know if they were originally his or not. So it's just a general count. In regards to your other question, I really don't know. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 00:11, October 25, 2012 (UTC)


 * Well after "Jam Defender" destroyed "Revival Jam" in order to nullify the Battle Damage between "Buster Blader" and "Slifer", the latter wasn't destroyed despite it being weaker. This probably means that in Battle City, a monster can't be destroyed if no Battle Damage, but that is just my assumption as I don't know another instance prior to season 4 where more real life game instances are placed in. It was also stated that Slifer's second mouth counted as some sort of attack as its effect didn't activate while "Nightmare's Steelcage" was active. A similar thing applied to Yami Marik's Duel with Yami Yugi as he was able to activate "Surprise Attack from Beyond" even though "Ra" didn't attack. I will make note of the last note a bit later, so you can read this part.Cardsknower (talk • contribs) 00:24, October 25, 2012 (UTC)Cardsknower


 * I would personally chalk it up to "the God cards are allowed to screw the rules". Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 00:26, October 25, 2012 (UTC)


 * After all this, I would agree now because the Egyptian God cards probably have a lot of strange effects and rulings that they can bypass some rulings under certain conditions. That was probably just for Battle City though because after that, the God cards had to follow a couple of regular rulings.Cardsknower (talk • contribs) 00:30, October 25, 2012 (UTC)Cardsknower


 * And Seto wanted those Gods so he just let them screw the rulings until he get them in his hand (which unfortunate had failing to do so) -- i  F  r  e  d  C  a  t  09:30, October 25, 2012 (UTC)

The Pyramid of Light movie discrepancy
I found a huge discrepancy in Yugi and Kaiba's Duel. Yugi appeared to have 41 cards in his Deck instead of the standard forty in a player's Deck. This is so far one of the few known Duels in the anime or movies where a character is shown to have more than forty cards in their Deck(Others include the Duel with Dartz and the Ceremonial Battle). If Yugi had forty cards in his Deck, Yugi would have lost after Anubis ended his turn which was after his two monsters destroyed Yugi's two monsters.Cardsknower (talk • contribs) 04:08, October 26, 2012 (UTC)Cardsknower


 * I don't have an explanation for that. The movie had a lot of errors in it with card art the like (Yugi had two copies of "Ra" at one point), so I think it was just that, an error. For what's it worth, the novel gives an exact forty-card readout of Yugi's Deck (along with Kaiba's and Pegasus's), which can be found on Yugi's Decklist page. Doesn't appear to help here though. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 12:07, October 26, 2012 (UTC)

Pegasus in the GX manga
The infobox on the Maximillion Pegasus page says that he appears in the ''Yu-Gi-Oh! GX'' manga. Is this true? -- Deltaneos (talk) 18:44, October 27, 2012 (UTC)


 * I vaguely remember a flashback scene he was in, but I could be misremembering. I'm short on time right now, but I can check it later tonight. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 18:48, October 27, 2012 (UTC)


 * He appears in one panel in chapter 61. When Tragoedia extracts his heart from "Winged Kuriboh", he views its memories. He sees it as a stone tablet in Egypt, the physical card's creation by Pegasus (which presumably tied the spirit to the card), its memories of Koyo and its memories of passing the Feather of Ma'at to LADD. I can upload an image if you like. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 22:55, October 27, 2012 (UTC)


 * Thank you. Nah, you don't need to upload it, unless you think it's needed for an article. -- Deltaneos (talk) 11:22, October 28, 2012 (UTC)

Better Than TBA>?
I Really Like How its Much Better to put ? on The Duel Results This is An Example How if ? If This Was Added instead of TBA What Do You Think

Yu-Gi-Oh! ZEXAL II
Did You Even Watched Episode 77 of ZEXAL The Student Council President is Under Barains Control

5D's 150
Should I change the wording in Misty's (and others if the same) article a bit? I ask because we see everyone cheering him on as an image (Yusei was in space, so wouldn't it be speculation to say she returned to Domino city when we only saw their image?). Shardsilver (talk • contribs) 19:37, November 2, 2012 (UTC)


 * Yeah, I would remove the mention of her returning to New Domino City. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 22:15, November 2, 2012 (UTC)

TCG/OCG
Should these terms be written in italics or not? I see both a lot so I really don't know for sure which's the correct one. :/ LegendaryAsariUgetsu (talk • contribs) 23:11, November 3, 2012 (UTC)


 * Yes. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 23:13, November 3, 2012 (UTC)

A question about Alit
Why would Alit be interested in Tori and which episode showed Alit falling for Tori(which led to him to try and claim her heart)?Cardsknower (talk • contribs) 22:29, November 4, 2012 (UTC)Cardsknower


 * One of the recent previews mentions this. I think its episode 80 or 81. As to why, I dunno. Because the writers are stupid? Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 22:30, November 4, 2012 (UTC)


 * It's episode 80. It's not probably because of how intelligent the writers are. It's probably something that would probably be elaborated on in episode 80. We should wait until the episode airs in Japan.Cardsknower (talk • contribs) 22:35, November 4, 2012 (UTC)Cardsknower


 * I'm sure there will be an explanation. I just don't have high hopes that it will be a good explanation, though I'm very cynical, so w/e. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 22:37, November 4, 2012 (UTC)

Zubaba Archetype
Hi I saw you deleted the last page that was the Zubaba Archetype for having just 2 cards should I make it now since Zubaba General has been confirmed.--Veriteo (talk • contribs) 09:20, November 5, 2012 (UTC)


 * Restored. -Falzar FZ- (talk page|useful stuff) 10:38, November 5, 2012 (UTC)

"Reconstructed effect|anime"
Why is that template box necessary? According to the words, they say "This card's effect in the anime was never shown fully and/or directly..." It seems incorrect, as Schroeder fully "showed" the effect (by using it and explaining it). I have the feeling you mean "This card's effect text in the anime was never shown fully and/or directly." In that case, is there some way you can change the text box's wording to reflect this? --UltimateKuriboh (talk • contribs) 17:12, November 5, 2012 (UTC)


 * If you can't see the full text, it's needed. By "shown", it does mean the written text. I'll edit the template to clarify, I agree the wording needs work. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 17:23, November 5, 2012 (UTC)


 * I changed "effect" to "written lore". Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 17:26, November 5, 2012 (UTC)

5D's MC Images
Should that RexGoodwin guy be editing them? I've seen in several places that images should be centralised images of a character's face, but GX + 5D's had those great images of the MC + their aces, so I was wondering whether or not I should revert his edits (Plus he adds new images without overriding the old ones...) TheScarecrow14 (talk • contribs) 18:40, November 5, 2012 (UTC)


 * Agreeing with Scarecrow, the others did actually have their aces too. I want to revert them as well, but I'm not sure what to do. Shardsilver (talk • contribs) 18:47, November 5, 2012 (UTC)


 * I personally love the character images with the ace cards. For me, using them instead of one that gives a slightly better view of the character's face is a case of ignoring the rules because I think it's better. You can revert him if you like, mention why in your edit summary. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 22:49, November 5, 2012 (UTC)

Damage Calculation
I only have one question about this topic. If you alter the ATK and DEF of a monster during Damage Calculation, will it affect the amount of Battle Damage that is inflicted. For example, if you use "Hedge Guard" on a monster that would be destroyed, will its new ATK and DEF affect the amount of damage you will receive during Damage Calculation? I know you haven't play the game in a while, but this got me confused for a couple of days.Cardsknower (talk • contribs) 04:59, November 6, 2012 (UTC)Cardsknower


 * That is how I would assume it would work if I was still playing - you would calculate based on the new value. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 15:00, November 6, 2012 (UTC)

Magical Hats (anime)
In the anime, "Magical Hats" was very tricky and versatile (and had unique stuff that the TCG/OCG couldn't do). What do you propose to do for the anime effect? Eventually people will wonder why it doesn't have an anime effect... --UltimateKuriboh (talk • contribs) 18:14, November 7, 2012 (UTC)