Tiers should be deleted

[Super Peter]

It seems like whoever controls the tier part of the forums does not play or does not know how to play this game at all..ex; bws are in t3 dragunity and miracle heros are in t2 he/she even went as far as moving gbs to t3..I as a dedicated gb player does not like to see my deck classified lower than decks that it is not lower than and imsure other players who are dedicated to certain decks feel the same way..tiers should be deleted and it should just be a deck decussion thread I'm sure this change would make a lot of people happy and not feel their deck is any worse than the next deck. Idc if we need a poll or somthing but somthing must be done becayse this is getting redic

[cyslim5]

Have to agree with this. LS is a Tier 3 deck which almost nobody uses, yet it's only on Tier 2 because mods whore the deck (no offence).

[SnakeRattle]

I gotta agree with you guys, I really don't understand the mods choice with dropping glads and bw down to tier 3. Both are amazing decks and atleast deserve to be tier 2+.

Super Peter I really like your idea about the polls, but I don't think the tiers should be deleted. Personally I think things would work better if the choice of which decks go in what tiers was left to us, the players.

All in all I think we should be allowed to vote on the decks to decide tiers.....just my 2 cents.

[BigStinkin'Ape]

The tiers are still an issue for us, the format changes so rapidly that we are lookign to find a way to classify the various discussions in such a way to reflect that. Currently were just moving them based on placement at that most recent YCS. This system does not work as by the time we get them "right" where they need to be, the format shifts due to another set release or som unpredicted deck topping.

In short, our system isn't perfect, but were open to suggestions on a new one.

[Ancient_Gladiator_Dragon]

I think Glads can stay in Tier 3.
YCS Philadelphia (http://www.konami.com/yugioh/blog/?p=4497): No Glads
YCS Atlanta (http://www.konami.com/yugioh/blog/?p=4861): No Glads
YCS Dallas (http://www.konami.com/yugioh/blog/?p=5172): No Glads
YCS Charlotte (http://www.konami.com/yugioh/blog/?p=5393): No Glads

In the last FOUR American YCS Championships no Gladiator Beast builds have been in the Top 32. Last I checked, even Tier 2 decks make Top 32.

Blackwings, I disagree with moving to Tier 3. I would be comfortable moving them to Tier 2 if anything. They haven't made it passed Top 16 in how long?

I do however disagree with Dragunities moving to Tier 2. They had ONE good showing. One showing isn't enough to show how good a deck is.

I have no opinion either which way on the matter of Lightsworns.

I personally like the Tier system as it is. If you have a complaint, and can back it up with evidence that isn't "I play the deck and it's really good", then I'm sure that you can post it somewhere in the Site/Forum Feedback section to discuss whether it should be changed or not. It'd be a nice change of pace from "How do I change my signature?" threads.

[Velius]

^ Definitely agree with this on GB's. Tier 3, all the way.

If we're going to go by the most recent YCS for the tier decisions, then it needs to be taken into account that there was a Blackwing deck in the top 32. Given the deck's successful past, I think this warrants the deck's placing in the Tier 2 category. Blackwings have been topping since their release and one bad showing at an event shouldn't have THAT much of an effect on its tier placement IMO. When was the last time Lightsworns won a YCS/Jump? And they're above Blackwings in tiers? I think more time should be given before the axe is brought down on Blackwings.

I think the most simple solution would be to simply have a "Tier Poll" or something like this.

[Super Peter]

So we don't take regs into consideration? I also understand you have your opinion about glads but you are silly if you think gbs are tier 3..I can take any gb deck and downright destroy any top tier deck..dragunity is obvlsy t1..I think you fail to realaize what tops a ycs has a lot to do with representation..its so many viable decks out right now the format is wide open..making one deck discussion thread with all the decks in it instead of the tier 1 2 3 system is much better. The tier system is only based of opinion my idea is based of fact and what is actually beeing played at the moment..if anyone has a dgz acount you see how successful they are with just deck discussion..dragunity and miracle heros are def not t2 they are 5q

[Char956]

just go to deck thread section that splits off into active and inactive. Decks like cyberdarks aren't being played. so move them to inactive decks. The active list is for everyone else. All of those "what is tier 1" threads get deleted and you can't create new threads in it except by mod approval.

[Ancient_Gladiator_Dragon]

The entire point of the tier system is to represent what tops. Whether that be for how much it's represented or how good it is. It's not my opinion what made the Top 32, that is fact. If we sat there and placed all of the "good" decks into a section, people who argue everyday because they don't think this deck is good and that deck is better. If you base it on opinions then things start getting screwed up.

We also can't put all of the decks into one section. Things look cluttered up enough. If you put all of that clutter in one place then you'll have to sift through two pages of stuff you don't want just to find the one thing you do. Separating the decks into these sections gives them some organization, thus reducing the clutter.

Regarding Regionals: I would love for them to be represented. Since last august there have been 135 regionals. With a large amount of data like that, we could have a much more accurate system. Tell me what the Top 32 of the Regional in Natick Massachusetts was on March 5th. More than likely you won't be able to tell me. I don't know. If there was official data regarding the things that topped Regionals we could actually take it into consideration. I have no idea where it is. I would love to read it. As of now, we CAN'T take them into consideration for the simple fact that we don't know what happened.

Regarding Dragunities: I don't believe one good showing is enough to change their level instantly. If that were the way things worked, two countries would get together, have a single battle, and the war would be over because since the one side won once, they will win every single battle in the future and there is no point in continuing to try. If they do it again, it solidifies their place as a Tier 1 deck.

Edit: I like Char's idea. This will likely cut down the clutter. Do we really need Toon's and Mist Valley in the same place as Gdagets, Disaster Dragon, and Glads?

[Audioslayne]

just go to deck thread section that splits off into active and inactive. Decks like cyberdarks aren't being played. so move them to inactive decks. The active list is for everyone else. All of those "what is tier 1" threads get deleted and you can't create new threads in it except by mod approval.

I dont know about inactive vs active threads, but I definitely like mod approval to post threads and one massive section. Basically just take out any deck that hasnt had a post in like 2 weeks and lump everything else into one area. This would require, however, a MUCH more well kept Official Thread Request Thread, for frankly what he have now is laughable at best.

EDIT: A regional results and a YCS pinned results thread displaying the decks that topped could help people figure out whats doing well without segregating into tiers.

[the_ninja1001]

i have to agree with taking down the tier sections and putting up a split active and inactive thread section i also like a direct link or section dedicated to whats winning right now thread so people can just look at whats topping and whats dropping. This all sounds good and easy on paper the actual man hours and work involved with this endeavor is going to be difficult and all of us in the player base that want a change in the organization of the thread we need to do our best to help. the best way for us to help is start working out the small details and working on a new layout of the section so when/if the mods hear this and see the effort we put in they will be more inclined to do there part so

things we want?
things we dont want?
ways to organize it?

and we have to vote/poll the ideas it will take time but all good change takes time
...obama speech = change? lolz

[Lightsworn395]

I would like to see the teirs go like this

1: good decks that consistently top 2-4 in teir 1
Competitive: able to compete but loses to 1
LS
GB
BW
Infernity
Naturia plants (fun little deck)
scraps
Karakuri
eTC

3 not so great and will never be good
Mokey Mokey
cloudian
Malefics
random ****

[phantom2250]

If it was up to me we would have gotten rid of tiers a long, long time ago.

[Super Peter]

Malefic and chaos variants are good decks

[Lightsworn395]

How are Malefics good

the only decent ones are MSD and MCED

and MST ****s all over that deck

[the_ninja1001]

Malefic and chaos variants are good decks

Good and tier are 2 completely different things in yugioh my current deck assault modes is a good deck but its not a tier deck..

*note malefics are terrible

[Char956]

MST can't do **** to MSD since MSD prevents field spells from being destroyed. But this isn't about that.

The only real thing to do is to keep active decks separate from those that aren't. Otherwise you end up having decks like lightsworn that don't top but somehow stay in tier 2 in the same area as decks like mill where they had one showing from one kid who ran an original deck who got a top 4. If we were in ZombieSworn format, you could have clear tiers since it was simple Zombies, Lightsworn, Blackwings, and GB that were competitive. Everything else wasn't relevant. But now there are too many decks that we don't know how accurate the tiers really are. Look at Nats last year where 80% of people showed up with Sabers. I mean we knew sabers were tier 1, but based on that top 16, you'd have thought sabers were tier 0 when they weren't.

Besides, any tier system is always going to have decks that are questionable in what their tier status is. How many competitions do you need without tops before you're officially demoted from one tier to another? How many times does your deck need to succeed to be able to move up tiers? Those questions are arbitrary in nature and either need a formulaic response that's open to everyone or it has to be left up to the judgment of whoever moves tiers.

In reality, if you have a section devoted to threads purely on active decks, you have maybe 15-20 decks. Honestly if pressing the scroll button is that hard, then you've got problems anyway. Besides, the top decks typically have more people on the threads anyway, so they will gravitate toward the top.

I don't know, I just don't see why this is a hard decision.

[Lightsworn395]

I said MST destroys Malefic Decks

not MSD



anyways I still want a 3 partition system

the best
stuff thats good/not garbage
garbage

[Drill warrior]

I agree with Mod about Blackwing, and Gladiators being moved down to Tier 3 because... I'm not "worried".

Reason:
Blackwing get its last support in Extreme Victory! Set (Wanderer, and some Bws), and Crow Pack (Cheap Rarity Bws, and Zerphys).

GBs get TCG exclusive, and get several support on Extreme Victory! Set.

I "believe" they will go back up to Tier 1-2.

My opinions: There's no point to Bashing, or Negative about Tier 3. For Example. Don't call Malefic or Tier 3 like... it's "Tier 3" as Weak level, they are not "weak" but different but not able to compete up to tier 2 level.

[Super Peter]

If it was up to me we would have gotten rid of tiers a long, long time ago.


Whom is it up to....

[Pharaoh Horus]

Instead of criticizing the staff like a bunch of jackasses, you could contribute to make the tier sections more accurate, by finding means to post what has been topping Regional Qualifiers, instead of basing the whole of your argument(s) on the last YCS alone.

Note: Any YCS prior has no validity in this discussion, as that was before the new format.

By definition, there are three levels of Tier. Tier 1, being the best decks in the game at that point in time. Samurai are an example of Tier 1.

Tier 2, is a tad more broad. Tier 2 is composed of all decks that don't make the cut to be in the Tier 1 category but still remain to be competitive, to varying degrees. Blackwings, Gladiator Beasts, Lightsworn, E-Heroes, Gadgets, Anti-Meta, all of these are Tier 2.

Tier 3, is composed of purely casual decks, not truly designed for the present competitive environment. A deck dedicated to Vennominaga would be Tier 3.

However, there is of course, the fabled Tier 0, which is more of a circumstance than an actual Tier (when one deck, and one deck alone dominates the metagame, nationally or globally).

[Super Peter]

Or just get rid of the tier system

[cyslim5]

^This. Just do what DGZ have just implemented by having a section for decks commonly run and for rogue decks, instead of having to b***h about what decks are in which tier and having mods whore over whether they should leave a Tier 3 deck in a Tier 2 section.

[Lightsworn395]

Whom is it up to....

I would also know this ^


who is truly in charge of TCG player

[RescueCat12]

The TCG Guy. He can see everything and everyone, all at once. He lives on a secret island that is so secret, even he doesn't know where it is. No one knows what he looks like, not even his mother. I'm probably going to get a life ban for typing his name, so see y'all.

On topic, I think the Tier system now is fine. I think it divides the tiers up well enough and keeps it tidy as well.

[Lightsworn395]

The TCG Guy. He can see everything and everyone, all at once. He lives on a secret island that is so secret, even he doesn't know where it is. No one knows what he looks like, not even his mother. I'm probably going to get a life ban for typing his name, so see y'all.


your ban was in vain ^

I learned nothing...


probably missing the big picture

[Char956]

Instead of criticizing the staff like a bunch of jackasses, you could contribute to make the tier sections more accurate, by finding means to post what has been topping Regional Qualifiers, instead of basing the whole of your argument(s) on the last YCS alone.

Note: Any YCS prior has no validity in this discussion, as that was before the new format.

By definition, there are three levels of Tier. Tier 1, being the best decks in the game at that point in time. Samurai are an example of Tier 1.

Tier 2, is a tad more broad. Tier 2 is composed of all decks that don't make the cut to be in the Tier 1 category but still remain to be competitive, to varying degrees. Blackwings, Gladiator Beasts, Lightsworn, E-Heroes, Gadgets, Anti-Meta, all of these are Tier 2.

Tier 3, is composed of purely casual decks, not truly designed for the present competitive environment. A deck dedicated to Vennominaga would be Tier 3.

However, there is of course, the fabled Tier 0, which is more of a circumstance than an actual Tier (when one deck, and one deck alone dominates the metagame, nationally or globally).

no one is being a jack***. what we're saying is that the tier system isn't accurate. We can't vote a deck into tier 1 or 2 or 3. You all have to move it. The fact that people can't determine what is tier 1 or 2 or 3 accurately proves that the current system isn't adequate. I just don't see why we have tiers or why we even need them. If you play this game look at previous ycs tops and see what makes it if you want to know what's competitive. Otherwise, unless you're hopping from deck to deck it doesn't really matter. It makes things easy for you all and for us because you don't have to do anything except move a thread from relevant to not relevant. Honestly, Toon decks and Disaster Dragon are not equal tiers. Disaster Dragon may not be a tier 1 deck, but it's still actually played.

[Lightsworn395]

I somewhat like the idea of making 2 sections

competitive and fun/not so good

[hiranyou]

i think it should be a poll to decide the tiers, but also take into account what each deck in the meta can do and is doing, and why there doing it? bws i believe are tier 1.5 why?, because there track record, plus the ban list wasnt so hard on them, and also with the crow pack and extreme victory coming out they get new key cards, lightsworns well i believe there tier 2, why because the deck is still good, and what i mean by that is its a solid deck, still strong but not tier one, gladds why are they tier 3?, there atleast tier 2 if not 1.5, there not played as much, but there still a tough match up, and they place in the top 8 at almost every regional.

[RescueCat12]

I think having more Tiers could be a viable option. Maybe if we have 5 tiers, what Char said about Toons and Disaster Dragon might not happen.

[Super Peter]

Thats even worse than what we have now did you not read through the thread?

Delete the tier system and do what cyslim said

[Veritas]

http://www.pojo.biz/board/showthread.php?t=933919 <- This and a divided "Established/Rouge" Section will be fine. The Established would be whatever top 32's at the last YCS. The Rouge would obviously be everything else.

[brotacular7]

http://www.pojo.biz/board/showthread.php?t=933919 <- This and a divided "Established/Rouge" Section will be fine. The Established would be whatever top 32's at the last YCS. The Rouge would obviously be everything else.
the best plan would be to emulate dgz in the established/rogue methods. however, your 100% incorrect in saying that whatever tops a ycs should be in established deck discussion. just because empty jar topped does not mean its an established deck or largely run. a poll could be implemented, or simply be up to the udgment of the mods. but the established/rogue would be the best and most obvious decision right now.

[tackyrice]

i don't know why people are taking this to heart. their is no actually "tier" per say. just another opinion on what is good during the formats. like in any and every other game: mvc3, sf4, etc.

mvc2: sentinel = tier 1
mvc3: sentinel = tier 1 (lols)

and any deck with 3 pot of dualities is tier 1 in my book, i'm just saying...

[Veritas]

the best plan would be to emulate dgz in the established/rogue methods. however, your 100% incorrect in saying that whatever tops a ycs should be in established deck discussion. just because empty jar topped does not mean its an established deck or largely run. a poll could be implemented, or simply be up to the udgment of the mods. but the established/rogue would be the best and most obvious decision right now.
Considering that the deck T4'd in a YCS, one must admit that it is possible for it to consistently win against competitive decks. That is the very definition of an Established Deck in my world. How else would a deck become Established if it does not win?

I still have not seen a better option than what I have proposed. A poll would be bad, since there is no obvious time at which it would have to be replaced with another poll. Also, considering that bad players will simply vote their decks T1, even when it obv has not Established itself at a regional or YCS, the poll is a bad idea. Mods don't need to take their time to decide what is or is not Established/Rouge, and nor do I think that they would not argue among themselves in order to solve it.

The way that I have suggested has a defined method that will allow one to see what is being used at regionals around the country as well as what has topped the latest YCS.

[Lightsworn395]

5 tiers would be even worse


honestly I think we should have a poll BUT only decks that get nominated by a nice article about WHY it should go where and WHY it deserves the spot


unless empty JAr starts topping EVERY jump it will never make it past teir 3

[Char956]

so lets just get rid of tiers all together...i honestly think that I've put forth the best idea. decks that are played are in their own category and rogue decks are another. It's fairly easy to tell which decks are played and which are not. Just look at when people comment on them.

[Lightsworn395]

I mean I do like that idea for ease but TBH I enjoy having the best of the best in their own little section

then competitive decks

then not so great decks

[Magician Man]

There's nothing wrong with the tiers themselves. They are a general indicator of a deck's worth based on it's success in the past, and how well it generally performs against other common decks. They aren't very accurate, but they aren't really meant to be. Also, tiers can be subjective sometimes, and can change very suddenly.

The problem is people asking too much detail from a vague standard.

[Freepoints]

There's nothing wrong with the tiers themselves. They are a vague indicator of a deck's worth based on it's success in the past, and how well it generally performs against other common decks. They aren't very accurate, but they aren't really meant to be. Also, tiers can be very subjective and change very suddenly.

The problem is people asking too much detail from a vague standard.

I agree with this.

[BigStinkin'Ape]

To those of you arguing for a complete deletion of the tier system (excluding phantom): If you like DGZ's method of doing things fine, but TCG is not DGZ. We, the moderators, will once again discuss this matter in the very near future. Any imput on a clearly defined layout to be used in place of the existing 3 tiered system can be posted in the site suggestions thread in the fourm feed back section.

Also, to answer the foolish question: "who is in charge" consider this: we are just the mid level guys. We get some advice and suggestions from the admins (like LIGHTNINGBLITZ) and the admin's in turn get advice from chedy when asked. There isn't one set person in charge. Chedy has a whole site to run. He does not dabble in every games various mechanics, let alone the specifics of competitivity classification in our section.

The issue with "what is meta and what is rogue", as a classification system is again how to class rogue? That can change as much as tier one can from tournament to tournament.

Do not continue to bash we the moderation staff for not swiftly handling this. It is a far more complex issue than you likely realize.

[ZackSmitherman]

(pulls out fire extinguisher)
Whoa! whoa! everybody calm down!
Doesn't the Tier system allow archetype sorting as well as show what decks are topping?

[Lightsworn395]

(pulls out fire extinguisher)
Whoa! whoa! everybody calm down!
Doesn't the Tier system allow archetype sorting as well as show what decks are topping?


I like that


I think that I have finally come down to my solid opinion

I liked alot of opinions but All in all i support

tier reform not tier deletion

[JerkJerk]

Or, you just have a section dedicated to arguing about the Tier levels, and just organize the deck discussions alphabetically in other subsections.

Section 1: Tier Discussion
Section 2: Deck Discussions A-M
Section 3: Deck Discussions N-Z

Any archetype or deck discussion that begins with "C" would go in section 2 (e.g. Cloudians), X-Saber would go in Section 3, etc etc.

Simply put, you leave an entire section for things like Regional tourney results, debates about the ever changing Tiers, defining what Tiers are and should be. Open pools about Tiers, a massive list of Meta tops, etc. Honestly, it's not that difficult to use the search bar and find what you're looking for, or scrolling through a section. And tbh, so many discussion threads are inactive that the most popular threads would probably stay on Page 1.

[elfqink]

Or, you just have a section dedicated to arguing about the Tier levels, and just organize the deck discussions alphabetically in other subsections.

Section 1: Tier Discussion
Section 2: Deck Discussions A-M
Section 3: Deck Discussions N-Z

Any archetype or deck discussion that begins with "C" would go in section 2 (e.g. Cloudians), X-Saber would go in Section 3, etc etc.

Simply put, you leave an entire section for things like Regional tourney results, debates about the ever changing Tiers, defining what Tiers are and should be. Open pools about Tiers, a massive list of Meta tops, etc. Honestly, it's not that difficult to use the search bar and find what you're looking for, or scrolling through a section. And tbh, so many discussion threads are inactive that the most popular threads would probably stay on Page 1.

I have to agree with this, I like the idea sorting alphabetically, as not by Tier sorting. Tier sorting depends on the metagame in each place, not in every part of the world all metagame is the same. Like here in Indonesia, X-Sabers are not that competitive, I can bullied Blackwing, etc. If you put the Tiers from the championships, you should put it into Champions Section, not by making Tiers from it.
I was so sad to see Disaster Dragon is in Tier 3, I guess the deck quite competitive as I'd never lose a single match here. And also my friends said that is a strong deck as I'm the only one who played Disaster Dragon. But to see it's in Tier 3 section, makes me really sad. :(

[the_ninja1001]

Or, you just have a section dedicated to arguing about the Tier levels, and just organize the deck discussions alphabetically in other subsections.

Section 1: Tier Discussion
Section 2: Deck Discussions A-M
Section 3: Deck Discussions N-Z

Any archetype or deck discussion that begins with "C" would go in section 2 (e.g. Cloudians), X-Saber would go in Section 3, etc etc.

Simply put, you leave an entire section for things like Regional tourney results, debates about the ever changing Tiers, defining what Tiers are and should be. Open pools about Tiers, a massive list of Meta tops, etc. Honestly, it's not that difficult to use the search bar and find what you're looking for, or scrolling through a section. And tbh, so many discussion threads are inactive that the most popular threads would probably stay on Page 1.

i to second the liking of an alphabetical set up that way you can go into section 2 or 3 and just find the section your looking for ie i want to talk about zombies section 3.. its not on the first page oh no search for titles containing the word zombie hey there it is

from there section 1 can be used to break the decks up into good bad ugly ect without separating the decks into tiers i really like this set up

[Lightsworn395]

see i don't really like the 1/2 1/2 random teirs by alphabet I'd rather it be 1/2 good decks 1/2 not so good decks
this of course is ASSUMING we were forced to make 2 sections

[AntiMeta_101]

I think that its kind of redic to say that they should do away with the tier system. Just because its hard for it to be accurate doesnt mean it does almost exactly what its trying to do. I mean if your trying to play some deck that never sees any play, its gonna be in tier three a couple of pages back because nobody posts on it, your playing an unpopular deck and thats gonna happen, i think hat to say the orginazation of the tiers is great, the more posts it gets the more its one the front page, which makes sense because more people care. As far as what goes in what tier, the moderators are exactly right, its tough when you only get YCS data, most people only care for YCS data, and there has to be some kind of fact asd to whats top tier. If sams are topping everything, and getting that much play, as well as decks like gravekeepers, and sabers theres a reason for it. And if you really dont like the way TCG player does things stop posting here, obviously your choosing to belong to these forums and they're not gonna just do away with the tier system because a few people are miffed about where their decks are

[Kane-333]

Tiers are lame. It only discourages innovation and entertainment value.

Just consider the fact that many players that want to get better at the game come to forums like these and when they see tiers, its like shoving what deck they should be playing down their throats. It gives people a sense that they cannot win and then obtaining the cards to make "Tier 1" decks is a whole other hassle.

Good thing on my creeping spree, Ive seen posts saying the tier system would be removed. Not really my business though considering I dont really play anymore...I wonder why?

[anduril38]

Nobody is forcing anybody to play a deck. If people are so weak minded that they get influenced on what to play by a Tier system, then they are retarded.

[KotU]

Nobody is forcing anybody to play a deck. If people are so weak minded that they get influenced on what to play by a Tier system, then they are retarded.
^^^Agreed!

Only the weak get so sucked into the Tier system that they believe only those decks can win at all, other decks can still very much handle Locals & even Regionals. In the state of Florida, Disaster Dragon is quite the force & it TOPS majority of Locals & Regionals where it is present. I even like to build Zombies, Dark Worlds, Scraps, Naturias, & Macro decks in order to compete with higher end decks & defeat them.

Many players in my area can't afford to build the TOP Tier decks, so I build obscure decks & showcase them by battling with Tier decks and winning. Then those players buy my decks that cost substantially less because they see that it can compete at least at the level that they play at. There is nothing wrong with the Tier system as it is, people are just so fickle about where the deck they like is located & that shouldn't matter.

I could care less if my deck is listed as Tier 3, long as I know that I can make that deck defeat Tier 1 decks consistently then it doesn't matter to me that the rest of the world can't.

[coachjschroth]

Exactly. Anybody can buy their way into a 6sam, x-saber or gk deck that runs 3 PoD, but if the player running it is inexperienced, then the deck fails.

[fishball232]

i did that with blackwings and they fail now. really tiers arne't that important like KotU said. if you can win and have fun thats it. you also have to be skilled player too. thats how the random empty jar deck topped in charlotte and the salvo in anaheim.

[Lightsworn395]

Exactly. Anybody can buy their way into a 6sam, x-saber or gk deck that runs 3 PoD, but if the player running it is inexperienced, then the deck fails.

Not exactly true. there is no such thing as a skilled Samurai player. the deck is literally autopilot

[anduril38]

There are naturally skilled players with Six Sam. Just not many. It's like Blackwings on crack.

[Lightsworn395]

I mean fair enough. just because it takes no skill to play sams doesn't mean that players with skill don't play them. I know at least 2 skilled players who play Samurai

[the_ninja1001]

Not exactly true. there is no such thing as a skilled Samurai player. the deck is literally autopilot

uh no -- did you go to dallas and see all the noobs fall on there face playing six sam not knowing when to stop overextending ect.. i mean yeah the decks not hard to play glad beasts x sabers even GK are harder to play but just cuz im playing something stupid and there playing fully loaded six sam with 2 warning ect dosent mean they auto beat me..i hate GK but i respect the deck enough not to say yeah its auto pility crap that any one with 3 PoD can play and win with.. show some respect oh sorry im dissing now i mean no disrespect lightsworn your a very good poster i just felt the comment was a little harsh

[exodiasezwhat]

The main problem seems to be that no one's updated the Discussion Index. Also, I agree that there's a major difference between meta in local, regional, and national play. You can't track Tier status for anything below national play, because there's no consistent front runner in every part of the country.

If we're going to have a broader Tier analysis, then it should be about at a minimum regional level play. We should also try to base these decisions on what makes Tier 1 or 2 on actual tournament reports, particularly those covered on the Konami blog (http://www.konami.com/yugioh/blog/), where full deck lists are posted. Considering that there is a huge amount of netdecking at that level anyways, you've already got your meta analysis built in on what players are doing in the top 16-32 of any Championship level tournament.

[levi15791]

I think that the tiers should be scrapped and have a competitive decktype board and a casual decktype board.

Competitive decktype board would include decks what a majority of people consider to be good contenders to top a YCS/Nationals level event. The casual would be all other decks.

As of now this is what I would suggest:

Competitive:

Blackwings
X-Saber
Six Samurai
Dragunity
Hero-Beat
Gladiator Beast
Fairy
Plants including Tengu Plant varaints
Karakuri including KMP

[XionTeikiatsu]

My two cents.

Although I mostly like the idea of tiers in general, I feel that, unlike fighting games, it creates a lot of unnecessary hassle because YGO as a whole is so dynamic; say, if something new tops or a drastically metagame-changing card on the level of Reborn Tengu is released, things can stand to shuffle a lot. Really, it's just because I find the whole forum split thing to be unnecessarily complicated. Instead, I would suggest an alphabetized index with links to specific theme discussions(at the top of the post, metagame level decks would be listed separate from other, less-played stuff, and if something does change it only requires moving links around, as opposed to physically shifting the threads).

Hell, there can even be tier 1-3 groupings within that thread. People can still discern what's topping by either checking the thread or just looking what's on the front pages with the most views. I believe this is also helpful because people misunderstand the word in general - tiers indicate usage and proven performance as opposed to how "good" that particular character/deck can be. This applies to all games that a tier list can be made for. Naturally, better, more consistent themes just gravitate to the top because players want to win and some decks win more than others.

[cyslim5]

Looks like Super Peter gets his wish ;D

I think there needs to be refinement on what should be considered to be the "meta". I would say the following should be in the meta section:

Hero Beat
GKs
GBs
Samurai
Sabers
Plants
Fish

The added problem these forums have is that there are many archetypes which are not considered at all, and some which don't belong with those decks; think of this as the BL tier that Pokemon battling has. I'd add the following to a semi-competitive section:

Dragunities
Lightsworn
Infernities
Blackwings
Worms
Frog
Monarchs
Dark World
Fabled
Gadgets
Karakuri
Disaster Dragon
Scrap
Psychic

All the others can then go into the rogue section.

If this is still under-process, then I'll post more when everything has come into effect.

[phantom2250]

If we do that we'd pretty much be going back to what we had before.

[cyslim5]

I guess so. It's either we put all the competitive decks as "meta", or we put competitive decks with unsupported archetypes.

[phantom2250]

We're just going to end up doing the first.

[Knight2e5]

Wow at Tier deletion.

[JerkJerk]

Looks like Super Peter gets his wish ;D

I think there needs to be refinement on what should be considered to be the "meta". I would say the following should be in the meta section:

Hero Beat
GKs
GBs
Samurai
Sabers
Plants
Fish

The added problem these forums have is that there are many archetypes which are not considered at all, and some which don't belong with those decks; think of this as the BL tier that Pokemon battling has. I'd add the following to a semi-competitive section:

Dragunities
Lightsworn
Infernities
Blackwings
Worms
Frog
Monarchs
Dark World
Fabled
Gadgets
Karakuri
Disaster Dragon
Scrap
Psychic

All the others can then go into the rogue section.

If this is still under-process, then I'll post more when everything has come into effect.

The system isn't based on what is Tier anymore, it's about what you would likely see played by a competitive minded player at Regionals, Nationals or a Yu-Gi-Oh! Championship. If you don't know what is Tier 1, or the most popular decks out there, that's your fault for not keeping up. The decks which need to be in each section need to be redetermined, as we just got that section of the update done today.

[exodiasezwhat]

"Rogue" sounds cooler than "crap archetypes that won't ever win a YCS". Anyways, I like the new change and hope this helps to keep the various decks and archetypes a bit more in line with actual play than the "chosen few".

[BigStinkin'Ape]

"Rogue" sounds cooler than "crap archetypes that won't ever win a YCS". Anyways, I like the new change and hope this helps to keep the various decks and archetypes a bit more in line with actual play than the "chosen few".
I'm glad someone agrees, I fought for rogue to be the name. :)