Interview 3

What do you think about the state of Vanguard in general currently? Do you think that it's in a balanced or somewhat stable state, or are there massive power imbalances? Has the meta become stagnant, or is it fresh - maybe still changing?

As far as the game as a whole is concerned, the clans are actually more balanced against each other than it's been in years. Tourney reports and attendance can attest to this as we have much more variety in clans and decks than the game's ever had in history. The metagame remains a five deck meta, as it has been for most of G Era, with Royals and Shadows forever being relevant, not that it's necessarily a bad thing on its own. A lot of people seem to disagree though, mostly the hipsters who get all excited about their deck being in the meta without really giving much thought into the healthiness of the deck itself. The metagame is balanced. The best decks are obviously better than the not best decks, with a winrate of around 70-80% if you count out the times victory was gotten through lucksack, but that's fine. If there are no good decks in a game, there's no way for product to move.

All that said though, I think the shape of Vanguard's meta is headed in a dangerous spot. GBT12 and GBT11 proved that, Bushiroad does not care what decks get in the meta. If Bushiroad decides a certain decktype is becoming meta, it will become meta. Prime example being OTT's support in GBT12, although Kagero support in GBT11 counts too. Bushiroad does not let decks organically grow into relevance, they have the power and willingness to introduce overpowered cards into one clan in order to give it a chance to be relevant. This means the VG meta is everchanging, and there are only ever few safe investments. I am of the belief that decks should grow into metagame status organically, such as with the rise of Bladewing and Fenrir, a deck designed and improved by the community. Decks that were not given a batch of overpowered cards in one swoop in order to elevate its status. That's how I think the game should be balanced.

I personally believe that the reason Bushiroad changed their policy regarding supporting decks is due to overwhelming... Not pressure, more like, whining from the community. Vanguard's playerbase is younger than most other card games. A lot of people who play vanguard do not play other card games, or come from a casual kitchen table background where all decks and brews can be viable. Naturally, this combined with the structured, divided nature of the card game means that the Vanguard community is comprised of a lot of immature loyalists who will stop at nothing to whine at bushiroad for not giving their favorite clan enough support. If Bushiroad caves to fan demand over analysis and data, I'm afraid another case like Ichikishima would be repeated.

On the subject of Ichikishima - it's caused a lot of divide in the community about whether it was a good idea or not, or if Oracle Think Tank deserved it. What are your views on that? Do you think Ichikishima was even remotely deserved? And do you think that Ichikishima is the worst example of Bushiroad attempting to force a clan into relevancy, or have there been other, more divisive cards that caused entire metas to shift due to their existence?

Ichikishima is the worst example in recent history, but it's not the first. In BT13 meta we had Chaos Breaker, in GCB02 we had Flash Ripple, Odysseus. Both cards were format warping in power, most notably Odysseus, a card that forced Bushiroad to create two cards to combat the deck. Personally, ichikishima was not a card that OTT deserves, but I'm also of the belief that no clan deserves anything. Ichikishima's difference with Odysseus is that, it's a generic G unit that can be used in all OTT decks. It is similar to Gilles De Rais in GBT03 meta where every single DI deck is focused on that card, to the point where a deck would be criminally unoptimal if it didn't ran four copies. It's not a good idea, for sure. Single cards should not force entire formats to wrap around it, nor should it force entire clans to bend to it. Ichikishima was developed in response to numerous fan emails directed at Bushiroad by OTT players demanding better support for their clan, and Bushiroad went about the wrong way of doing it. The Battle Sister cards in GBT12, along with the Miko pair, helped craft OTT's identity as a fast, efficient deck that can devote early and not lose hand resources while doing it, as well as having a powerful and flavorful key card in Stollen. I've said before that Stollen is excellently designed for an OTT support card, and that it was criminal that it was restricted to Battle Sister. Stollen should have replaced Ichikishima as the deck's primary G Unit, because while it is powerful, it is not Strictly better than every card printed in that clan, and most other clans.

So, concerning Bushiroad's treatment of the game - how do you feel they can fix Ichikishima? Should she be banned or restricted? Should other cards be created to try to balance her out?

It would be better to create cards that balance her out, but only if it is available to all clans.

Do you think Bushiroad should avoid banning or restricting cards where possible?

Yeah, definitely. Banning and restricting should be last resorts.
Though, there are definitely times where banning or restricting is the only viable option. What I love about VG that I don't see applied in other cardgames is 'special restrictions', such as the one placed on Swordmy. Having such restrictions allow for creative builds to flourish easier.

Do you think these should be more encouraged in the future to allow more flexible bans and builds? For example, there is often the argument banning Melem outright would harm Fang more than it hurt Jet.(edited)

Indeed, however some cases simply cannot be done without it being overly blatant. For example, Mick and Urwatal. They couldn't have been restricted efficiently without having to write the words "Cannot be used in a deck with four copies of Vampire Princess of Night Fog, Nightrose/Chronojet Dragon G" on their restrictions.

Now, to sidetrack a little bit. With the new season of the anime around the corner, a new Rarity - ZRarity - revealed, and the box name being "Ultimate Stride", there is a lot of talk about a potential new mechanic - or perhaps expansion on Stride - soon. Do you have any thoughts or feelings about this?

I'm almost 90% positive Z-Rare is a replacement for SGR rarity, and it won't be a higher rarity containing two unique cards at much lower quantities than GRs. As far as there being a new mechanic, it seems likely, but I don't have any idea what it could be. GB8 strides could be seen as 'ultimate strides', so I really can't imagine what these will be.

Do you think the game could use a new mechanic? The latest revealed - not counting Generation Break Eight as a seperate mechanic from Generation Break - would be Generation Guard.

Hm, there's a lot of mechanics involved in Vanguard already, to the point where I'm not sure how they could add another Extra Deck mechanic without increasing the size of the Extra Deck. Although, I could see them implementing a different condition check/threshold in addition to Generation Break, and using that as the new mechanic. Sort of like Limit Break. I personally would like to see new main deck mechanics, since the newest one we had were keywords. I'd love for Vanguard to get card effects that could be activated during either player's turn.

On the topic of mechanics - how do you feel about Stride and G-Guardians? There, from my experience, is a large player divide between players believing that they helped save the game, and others thinking it has become stale, permanently fixated aronud Striding to the point where not being able to Stride is a death sentence.

It's a shift, that's for sure. Stride has made the game infinitely more dynamic, beause now games revolve around multiple Vanguards as opposed to one or two before Stride was introudced. Stride allows players to structure games for a long game, and not just rely on one card/strategy to win. It has led to a variety of interesting strategies and playstyles, as well as generally a more diverse and interesting play experience. Older players might feel it's become stale, but honestly, it's nowhere near as stale as Breakride or Legion format, where you'd sit on one card and attempt to perform one combo for every single one of your games.

As for G-Guardians, it's a balancing factor. G-Guardians allowed decks to further grow and evolve in power level because G-Guardians exist as a natural counter to the ever growing power threshold cards reach nowadays. It's a very good addition to the game and a good step to making the game more interactive and alive during both player's turns, since certain G-Guardians even enable you to perform plays during your opponents turn.

One common argument for Strides is that they help older decks stay relevant even in today's meta as cards grow older and new cards come into the limelight. Do you think Bushiroad succeeds - in general - at helping other decks keep up thanks to Strides and legacy support, or is it still mostly the Striders (e.g. Nightrose / Luard / Chronojet) that are in the best positions?

It has helped a variety of decks and strategies keep up with the newly introduced cards, with good examples being Maiden of (Viable locals-level deck), Seven Seas (Top deck during its time) and Eradicators (Viable anti-meta). The way Striders and Generation Break decks work, older decks will always be viable as faster options, meaning that they could do well with minimal, well-designed, effective support. Sadly, sometimes they have to completely remove the old cards as part of the strategy, such as with Blaster, a problem carried over from Yu-Gi-Oh.

And finally, to link back to your point earlier - "what Bushiroad wants to become meta will become meta". Do you think this is something that we see in every set? There are many people who are quick to accuse Bushiroad of being biased and caring more about selling money than supporting other, more "worthy" clans. Do you think there is truth in this, and that Bushiroad ignores clans who are weaker in the interest of making money, or will Ichikishima mark a turning point where Bushiroad will support worse-off clans, perhaps going too far?

If the last two sets are to be believed, we're definitely gonna see it in every set from now. At least in every main set. Bushiroad obviously cares about making money, people who think otherwise don't know how businesses work. Certain clans sell better, that's obvious. Bushiroad will continuously give support to them, so they can sell product. No clans are really worthy of any support, that's just what loyalists like to think. I believe starting from GBT11, Bushiroad will give complete revamps to certain decks which they feel are lagging behind in terms of playability. Darkness and Blaze in 11, Oracle and Thunderstrike in 12, and speculation runs rampant that Rescue and Wave will receive the same treatment in 13. I believe they'll only give this treatment to certain clans though, mostly ones that are popular and sell well, but are not top-tier good. The bottom clans, well, since there are only few people playing them anyway, it makes no sense to give them imbalanced powerful support. Some people use the argument that people are not playing the decks because they aren't good, but that's simply not true. Wizards and Dragons will always be more popular than Bugs and Dinosaurs, only people in denial would argue that.