>>717759306
what about maxx c strikes you as fair exactly
>inb4 it stops le combo decks that built huge fuck off negate boards
those decks can run it too, typically to greater effect than other decks
>it helps older less powerful decks keep up
most of the archetypes/strategies in yugioh lose instantly if maxx c goes off because getting their own board set up gives the opponent too many resources to use against them
>>717768998
>There's literally nothing wrong about designing the game around one card.
pic related
>>717772724
>Roach isn't on TCG and exactly same decks top.
two things about this
1. the mulcharmies (not sure if that's how it's spelled) are maxx c analogues and thus are functionally the same, and more importantly
2. the fact that the decks that rule tcg are often just as good in md indicates that roach being legal doesn't do anything to slow them down despite the roach defenders who insist the opposite
the good decks don't need roach to win and the bad decks can't win because roach exists, so at the end of the day it doesn't help anyone