The Yugioh Card Duel Arena 11.0

How exactly are they more broken than pre-existing cards though?

And there are already some cards in the real game that draw reference to some different religions. Solemn Jugdment, Dark Ruler Ha Des etc. And even The 3 Egyptian God cards for that matter. Ra is based on Ra. Slifer is based on Osiris, And Obelisk is based on Set.

They don't follow the standards for the archetype? How?

 

1st ****ing DARK. You must be blind at this point.
2nd Lightsworn that don't send cards to graveyard during end phase is not correct Lightsworn. Its trashsworn, mere bad imitation of archetype.
3rd existing religions Jaden. Do you see anybody worshipping Ra? No. Because religion don't exist any more. Solemn is based on Greek mythology, and you can guess, nobody worship Zeus any more, same case with Ha Des.
4th Card that can let you regain 20000+ LP during each of your standby phases in regular, not so great pure Lightsworn deck? Pretty broke in my book. Slam onto it negation of DARKs in grave and you have my official "**** it" sign.

 

Ok I get the picture...

Solemn is based on Greek Mythology? That's not what I heard.

And well the Dark one was just supposed to be the odd one of the bunch. There's even one Light Blackwing monster. So why not have one Dark Lightsworn monster?

 

With Solemn its my personal theory, basing it around characters that appearing in different Solemn cards. Anyway its design can suggest multiple religions.

Konami can allow themselves to make odd one, you cannot.

 

True. But I heard the old man depicted on the card is supposed to be God from Christianity. Hence it's powerful effect of stopping anything too.

And why is that?

 

Zeus was powerful too. And ladies from Forbidden series that also appear in Solemn series have more Greek-like appearance if you ask me, even if they have artefacts that can resemble Christian religion.

Because its Konami. They created archetype and only they can decide that one monster will go other way than others (example was Wulf). You are just some random person that have no idea how it should look and work.

 

Wow subtlety isn't in your vocabulary is it? lol you're way too harsh. Maybe I should just stop making cards then...

 

You should drop making card that are related to existing archetypes, that's for sure. In my book you do more than terrible job with those Lightsworns, not truly realizing how they work. Maybe try making your own archetype that will have reasonable effects.

And as for my vocabulary, its because I don't want to, because when I tried it before, it couldn't go trough to you. When its pointless I won't do it, unless I really feel like doing so.

 

Jeez that's quite a hurtful way of saying it...Thanks for making my inferiority complex even bigger...

Wait what are you talking about?

 

You are welcome.

When I tried before to make you understand why you do something bad while still trying to be nice, then it didn't work out well. But now when I make my point in not polite way it seems to work, so while discussing things with you I probably will keep that style of communication. As you said "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" or something like that.

 

That was sarcasm...................

I know that was what you meant. But I am not sure what you are referring to.

 

No **** Sherlock. You discovered America. Bravo.

Lets go back in time, to moment when you came back to arena and were angry that people dared to make jokes as method to deal with stuff. Good old days. People were trying to explain it to you, but that wasn't very effective.

 

At first I thought you were referring to that last argument you and I had. About why some of you were not upset when I thought I was leaving. I just decided to forget about that because it wasn't worth arguing about.

 

Also another example is when you made that other Lightsworn custom (and presented other Evil HERO customs) when you didn't wanted to listen to what I had to say, giving me very weak arguments. But now when I suddenly started being harsh it seems that it gets to you.

 

I wasn't arguing. I was merely making points to counter yours because I disagreed with them. Debating is the better term.

 

While I would debate the fact that arguing and debating are different, there is no "debate" flavored equivalent for "argument" the way it was being used there. To have a debate you *Must* present arguments.

 

This is debating:

Spoiler

Person A: The sky is green.
Person B: The sky is not green, it is blue.
Person A: But, look, I see it with my own two eyes! It's totally green!
Person B: There's a possibility you have color blindness, you might want to look into it.
Person A: Okay.

And THIS is arguing:

Spoiler

A: The sky is green.
B: No it's blue!
A: NO IT'S NOT ITS GREEN WHAT ARE YOU AN IDIOT OR SOMETHING LOOK IT'S TOTALLY GREEN!
B: NO IT'S NOT WHAT'S WRONG WITH YOU?!?!? EVERYONE KNOWS THAT THE SKY IS BLUE!!!
A: SHUT UP!!! I DON'T NEED TO HEAR THIS FROM YOU!!! YOU DON'T EVEN KNOW HOW TO PLEASE A WOMAN!!!
B: YOUR MOTHER!!!
A: WELL AT LEAST I'M NOT ADOPTED!!!
B: HURR!!!
A: DURR!!!
A+B: HUURRRRRDUUUUUUUUUURRRR!!!

 

Notice that its name was changed to Sephylon to make him less offensive, pointing at concept in religion rather than religion itself.

 

Argument:
1. an exchange of diverging or opposite views, typically a heated or angry one.
2. a reason or set of reasons given with the aim of persuading others that an action or idea is right or wrong.

Debate:
1. argue about (a subject), especially in a formal manner.

No logical debate can occur without presenting arguments.