Forum:Heavy Storm - a necessary evil?

This might be an odd topic but I wanted to share my experiences: Since the ban of Heavy Storm, I have noticed that people started playing far more traps than before, which is understandable given the fact that Heavy Storm was the biggest threat for Trap heavy decks. These people are glad that Heavy Storm is banned, but others think it is infuriating to face such a trap heavy deck.

The question is: Are Heavy Storm and other Mass Spell/Trap destroyers a necessary evil in the game?

Yes, they are. Without Heavy/Trunade/Cold Wave people will exploit every trap there is. Going first and setting 4 cards is an unfair move and without mass spell/trap removal one can't do anything against it. I do understand that they make OTKs easier, but facing a trap heavy deck without any answers is one the most frustrating experiences you can have in the game.

I think that in every format there should be at least one card allowed that helps you overcome such a massive backrow. What are your thoughts on this topic? Do you agree that we should have a way to fight back? Or are they gone for good? - BronzeJohnson (talk • contribs) 13:46, May 9, 2014 (UTC)

I say keep all of them gone for good. The mass S/T haters encourage too many OTK's and basically reward bad play. They're cheap shots that wipe away any chance your opponent has of recovering and pave the way for you to flood your field with tons of monsters and set all the backrow you want to set. You have to keep in mind that the best traps (Bottomless, Warning, Compulsory, Torrential, and Book of Moon) are all limited. That's only 5 cards in a 40 card-deck, it's not like you'll draw all of them early in the game. This format isn't a set 5, pass, and win format; in fact, in spite of the loss of Heavy Storm, aggro is still the top deck of the format, just much more grindy than before. Furthermore, set 4-5 and pass is healthy as f**k from a skill standpoint. It promotes a lot of player interaction and thinking before one makes his moves, and it punishes decks whose sole purpose is to OTK. Also, "Do you agree that we should have a way to fight back?" We have plenty of ways of fighting back against backrow. Triple MST, Triple Lance, Triple Royal Decree and Trap Stun, and several more (albeit deck-exclusives) such as Infestation Pandemic, Atlantean Marksman, Constellar Omega, Bujingi Hare, Turtle, and Centipede, Fire Fist Gorilla, Ghostrick Alucard, Evilswarm Exciton Knight, Hieratic Dragon of Su, ect. We don't need a universal mass S/T removal card in the game, what we have now is just fine. Ninety-eight (talk • contribs) 18:25, May 9, 2014 (UTC)

Imagine the following scenario: Your opponent sets 4 cards ("Black Horn of Heaven", "Forbidden Lance", "Breakthrough Skill" and "Dimensional Prison" - none of which are limited BTW) and summons "Thunder King Rai-Oh" or sets "Gravekeeper's Spy". At that point, you can't do anything without mass S/T destroyers.

The thing is that cards like Trap Stun and Royal Decree are very slow cards, and for the sake of this thread I disregarded Archetype exclusive S/T destruction. Also monsters like "Exciton Knight", "Ghostrick Alucard" and even "Jinzo" can be countered with "Solemn Warning" and "Bottomless Traphole".

Don't get me wrong, I dislike the OTKs that dominate the game nowadays, but I hate it even more when people exploit the fact that there is basically no threat to their traps. MST is not enough. Even if Heavy Storm would get un-banned, cards like "Starlight Road" and spell negating cards could stop it. The only other way is that Konami finds a balance between the banned mass S/T removal and the bad alternatives (*cough* *cough* Storm). - BronzeJohnson (talk • contribs) 18:57, May 9, 2014 (UTC)

While I completely understand you anger at decks that abuse traps, in my opinion it would be worse to have Heavy Storm. Few people actually abuse trap cards like that, and the people that do are cheapshots. Heavy Storm completely wipes any chance the opponent might have to counter your moves, and that's as bad as the people who abuse traps, the difference is that to abuse traps your deck needs to have enough space for lots of traps, and so few decks do it, but EVERYONE can have Heavy Storm. Again, I understand your anger at people who abuse traps, but see it like this: abusing traps and Heavy Storm are equally bad, but few decks can abuses traps while every deck can (and did, when they could) run Heavy Storm. You gotta take into account that any deck with a heavy focus on spell/traps would become too weak to be playable, while the meta decks that are already too strong, like Bujin, would become even stronger. Seriously, in an era with Shadolls and Cosmic Dragons, that we're just entering, being unable to respond during your opponent's turn means you lost from pretty much turn one.

Also take into account that Spell/Trap heavy decks, the ones that would most suffer from Heavy Storm usually HAVE NO ROOM for spell negating cards. Also, aside from the fact it summon Stardust Dragon, Starlight Road is a bad card: pretty much the only card it stops is Heavy Storm. Take a hint from the pokemon metagame: if something is so strong it forces every opponent to be prepared agains't it (forces everyone to run Starlight Road on main deck), and the only way to be prepared agains't it is with something that's only good for stopping that particular thing (Starlight Road also works agains't nukes, like Black Rose Dragon and Exciton Knight, but they're neither as easy to use nor as omnipresent as Heavy Storm would be), than the strong thing should be banned. Not to mention Heavy Storm, different from nukes, is likely to have no consequence to it's user, while nukes are more desperation moves (and again, Heavy storm is a costless spell, while Exciton and Black Rose Dragon require two summons).

EDIT: Just remembered of Dark Hole, but even then I think my point still stands (if only because while Heavy Storm was limited everyone used Starlight Road, while now it's banned almsot no one uses Starlight Road, despite the fact Dark Hole exists). AlephOzone (talk • contribs) 21:27, May 9, 2014 (UTC)

No offence but the OTK argument doesn't make much sense. Since OTKs last, by definition, one turn, temporary solutions such as Trap Stun can fill Heavy's role just fine. What the Heavyless format really punishes is recklessly aggressive play, like overcommitting to the board when you can't OTK. In other words, you can't just charge at your opponent and expect them to run out of traps before you run out of monsters anymore - you have to plan ahead and play cautiously. That's still a good thing though. I hear people defend Heavy by saying things like "picking what to set and what not to takes skill", but the truth is that the set 5 format takes far more skill. Instead of fearing Heavy, you now have to fear Mirror Force and Torrential and Compulsory and a dozen other contingencies, and it's incredibly difficult to account for them all yeah, but that's a good thing. It means the better player wins, instead of the player that draws Heavy first.

Or you can just do what I do and run triple MST and Lance in every deck that has room for it. Emmic (talk • contribs) 22:06, May 9, 2014 (UTC)