The Catapult Turtle Conundrum

Recently, a major errata was made to the OCG Catapult Turtle. It's effect has been changed to activate once per turn now. Most speculation points towards the Pendulum Summon mechanic being to blame, and this being an effort to curb OTK's based off of it in the future, but that's only speculation, given our limited knowledge of Pendulum Summoning. 

I'd like to step aside from Catapult Turtle for a second, and discuss a recent trend in the OCG. The rules were recently changed so that the player going first does not draw, to balance out the inherent advantage that comes with going first. The rules for field spell cards was also changed, so that both players can have a field spell active. These are interesting changes that go against over a decade of history -- very similar to the change in Catapult Turtle's effect. It's unknown at this time whether of not the TCG will make similar changes, so our discussion will remain in terms of the OCG. 

The point of interest about all these changes is that, for the most part, card design is much more interested in balance nowadays. Compare cards like Pot of Greed to Pot of Duality, or Pot of Acarice and Pot of Dichotomy. As a general rule, restrictions and conditions are placed on newer cards, as opposed to the unfettered cards that ran rampant back in the early days of the game. 

If the OCG is willing to add a restriction to an older card to prevent it from being misused, then it stands to reason that the same could be done to other cards -- specifically, cards on the Limited and Forbidden List (known as Limit Regulation in the OCG). Many of these "broken" cards are only there because they lack a "once-per-turn" clause, or a restriction like "except this card." Potentially, every single card could be balanced in time, and the F & L List would only be something needed until the cards on it are balanced for next format. 

Realistically, this won't happen. But that begs the question: why not? It doesn't seem very fair (or ethical) to only go back and change one card, when there are dozens that could benefit from such treatment. In the end, it could result in a healthier game, with a larger card pool. 

In the end, my opinion is this; it's all or nothing. If one card (that's been out for many years) is going to be changed, then all of the "unbalanced" cards should receive the same treatment. It seems silly to me to only change one card. If that's the case, I'd honestly prefer it was forbidden (or Semi-Limited, Limited, whatever the case is).