Cities In Review and Looking Ahead to States
Before jumping into this article, I should properly introduce myself since most writers on other sites do it. My name is Kennan, and I'm a competitive Master from Washington. I just got back into the game this year, but I managed to win one of the Fall Regionals and get a good number of top cuts/wins in Cities and Battle Roads. By writing for PB, I'm hoping to make myself more identifiable than writers on other sites, since PB currently has so few writers. I've already written a few articles about Regionals and Cities, so feel free to check them out if you haven't already (unfortunately, they're pretty outdated now.)
Anyway, cities are over, and States are still very far away, so there's no real rush to write about anything. States are probably the main topic of discussion, but we don't know what cards will be legal yet so it's risky writing a full article about the HS-ND format. Today, I'm just going to talk about my Cities experience, give a brief opinion on what the States format will look like, and offer a few general playing tips. Hopefully, I will have a Prerelease article coming out sometime next week.
Cities in Review
My Cities run could be summed up by one word: disappointing. I only made cut three times, and sunk from around 23rd in North America to being somewhere around 90th. I'll just recap what happened at all of the Cities I went to. Nine City Championships in one season is a personal record for me, and I had fun at all of them.
Cities 1 & 2
In the first week of Cities, I wanted to play my rogue Druddigon/Yanmega lock deck I talked about in my article a long time ago. However, I didn't think the format had defined itself enough to play it yet. So, I went with straight TyRam since it's a consistent deck. I think consistency is the most important factor to consider while deciding on what to play in an untested format.
It didn't take me long to learn that TyRam is outdated. At this point, Typhlosion is basically a worse Eelektrik, and Reshiram is just a worse Zekrom/Magnezone. I went 3-2 and 3-3 for the two Cities I played it in. After the second Cities, I decided I wanted to play Eelzone even though I had absolutely no experience with it. I borrowed about 80 dollars worth of cards, built a list without seeing any skeletons or anything, played three games against TyRam and Zekrom, and went into Cities with it the next day.
Cities 3
I was immediately surprised by just how good Eelzone was. If it gets setup without going down too many prizes, it's going to win. The one thing about the deck I've always hated is how dead of opening hands it tends to get. Those pre-Magnezone turns are scary. Anyway, I lost once to Charlie's Mewbox and again to Tyler Nimoura's "dreamkiller" Chandelure deck. I played horribly against Tyler, having no idea what the idea behind Chandelure was. I left an energy-less Eel on the bench and he used Lampent to bring it up. I didn't draw any energy the rest of the game.
However, Charlie went undefeated, I got paired up to David who went 5-1 (his loss being to me), and Tyler went 5-1 as well. I make cut in the 6th seed, with opponent's opponent's win percentage cursing me into playing Tyler again. He gets a really bad start game one, and I win with Thundurus before he can get any good setup. Game two he goes first and nails a Turn 2 Vileplume, just like he did in our swiss game. I scoop early since my Magneton was prized. Game three we both get bad starts, but I take a few prizes with Thundurus before time gets called. Basically, his only chance to win the game is if I flip tails twice on burn. He attacks me, and I flip tails. Ugh. He won't let me borrow his Dodrio for a turn, so I just have to pass. I flip tails again, ending the game. Tyler ends up getting second, losing to David's 19-energy Zekrom in the final.
Cities 4
I do much better at this Cities, starting 4-0 then getting downpaired to another Eelzone. I'm in a godly position, and basically have the guaranteed win. However, I play a Collector and an N in the same turn and get a game loss for it. Fortunately, I win the final round of swiss and make cut, finishing 5-1. I beat the opponent who I got a game-loss against in top eight, barely catching up on prizes in game three before time gets called. Then I beat Polo's TaKE/techs in top four with a well-timed N. In top two, I get two unplayable hands against Zekrom and lose twice, getting donked in one of those games.
Cities 5
I start this Cities 0-2, losing to a Kyurem/Feraligatr deck round one that ran much hotter than I did. Kyurem is a great card because if your opponent can't consistently OHKO it, you're going to win. Glaciate can just wreck any field if you can get a chain of them going. Round two I end up scooping to Zane Nelson after we both forgot he used Iron Breaker and I Lost Burn, draw a prize, and watch him play half his turn out. Chances are he would have had the game anyway. I then win the next two matches against newer players before getting donked by Kenny's Zekrom. I win the final round against another Eelzone, but finish 3-3.
Cities 6 & 7
Before these two Cities even start, I can tell Eelzone has become a bad play. Everybody realized it's the deck to beat, so the majority of the field is a bad matchup. However, I get lucky and am paired against new players most of the day. I finish 4-1, with my one loss being to Issiah where I deck myself. I'll talk about this game in more detail later. Anyway, I lose to Zekrom in top eight, staring down a T1 Tornadus or Zekrom two out of the three games. Catcher after Catcher prevents me from getting any foothold in games two and three. I don't even get a Magnezone out game three.
Cities seven only confirms my fears about Eelzone. I finish 3-2, losing to a Zekrom and a Six Corners. Basically the entire field was Zekrom, Six Corners, Chandelure, or Durant. All of these decks can give me a hard time if they run hot.
Cities 8 & 9
I finally switch decks for my last two Cities. I play the rogue Druddigon/Yanmega deck I wanted to play at the start of Cities. However, I run a lot of other techs to deal with Zekrom and other popular decks. The big issue is that it struggles against Durant, which seems to be the deck to beat at this point.
The first Cities I finish 3-3, losing by one prize to a Truth deck that gets a T2 Vileplume and Duosion, a Durant, and a Zekrom where I run cold and whiff everything I need. If I had played a Catcher a turn earlier against the Zekrom, I might have won that match. I tilted because of how bad my hand was in such a key game, and didn't think my turn through.
I stick with my deck for the last Cities, being convinced it's the BDIF. I finish 3-2, getting donked by Zekrom twice before I even get to draw a card.
I took these last two Cities too seriously. I knew I needed a lot of points badly, so I went in feeling like I had to win every game. This made me make a few misplays I probably wouldn't have otherwise. For example, I took a Juniper instead of a Judge off a Pokegear against the Durant deck on Saturday. That alone could have cost me the game, since he had been using Twins for a couple turns.
Review
It's incredibly frustrating to know that five of my nineteen losses at Cities happened because I either didn't get a turn or got a game loss while in an amazing position. That's over 25% which, in my opinion, is ridiculous. It's been said many times before, but the card creators/rule makers in Japan should give serious consideration to making it so first turn wins are impossible. I haven't met anybody who finds these wins good for the game. I believe I stared down a Turn 1 Zekrom/Tornadus 10 times at Cities if you don't count the times I got donked. I won seven of those games, so the issue is not with Zekrom, but with the rules of the game.
On the topic of bad win conditions, let's talk about Durant. This little ant created the most plain and straightforward deck I have ever seen in this game. Before Durant was printed, the idea of decking out was more a check on playing skill than anything else. If you decked out, you probably played too many draw cards and didn't use your resources sparingly. Durant changed that. Each time you play against Durant, you're playing against nothing more than a timer. If you get a good enough opening hand to set up an 80+ HP attacker capable of OHKOing a Durant every turn and they don't get good Crushing Hammer flips, you're probably going to win. Otherwise, you're going to lose. The Durant mirror is arguably worse.
The worst part about it is that Durant became the deck to beat at the end of Cities. The meta in my area last weekend was Vileplume decks running multiple Victini, Zekrom, TyRam, and of course Durant. The decks incapable of running with Durant did not see play (CaKE, Eelzone, most 6 Corners, etc.) Fortunately, this created a bad environment for Durant, and it didn't cut much. However, the simple threat of it dramatically limits deck choice.
Outside of Durant and first turn wins, this format was fairly enjoyable for me. Most decks' matchups were fairly even or 40-60/60-40. There were some exceptions, like Eelzone vs Chandelure and Zekrom vs Truth. However, there weren't a lot of situations where "people lost as soon as the pairings went up." Those types of matchups were much more common in HS-EP. However, the opening hand was a huge deciding factor in a lot of games I played. Maybe I didn't lose when the pairings went up, but I lost as soon as I drew my opening hand. However, this format is behind us. The question now is what Next Destinies will do the format.
Next Format
Before Next Destinies had been released, the format's matchups looked something like this:
| Eelzone | Chandelure | ZPST | Truth | 6 Corners | CaKE | Reshiram | Donphan | Durant | |
| Eelzone | 50% | 30% | 50% | 60% | 40% | 70% | 60% | 30% | 40% |
| Chandelure | 70% | 50% | 60% | 50% | 60% | 30% | 65% | 65% | 20% |
| ZPST | 50% | 40% | 50% | 15% | 40% | ? | 60% | 40% | 70% |
| Truth | 40% | 50% | 85% | 50% | 90% | 55% | 90% | 90% | 15% |
| 6 Corners | 60% | 40% | 60% | 10% | 50% | 60% | ? | 65% | 30%/70% |
| CaKE | 30% | 70% | ? | 45% | 40% | 50% | 40% | 75% | 60% |
| Reshiram | 40% | 35% | 40% | 10% | ? | 60% | 50% | 65% | 80% |
| Donphan | 70% | 35% | 60% | 10% | 35% | 25% | 35% | 50% | 20% |
| Durant | 60% | 80% | 30% | 85% | 70%/30% | 40% | 20% | 80% | 50% |
This might not feel relevant anymore, but it's a nice tool to have when deciding on what decks might be good next format. When it comes down to it, there are a couple matchups I just haven't played, so those are marked with a question mark. Durant vs CaKE depends a lot on what techs the CaKE deck is running (namely Landorus). Honestly, many of Durant's matchups depend on techs, but CaKE in particular since Kyurem can't do anything to Durant. I would post a matchup table for next format instead, but I just haven't played enough games in it to make it worthwhile and accurate.
Anyway, the card creators decided to bring back ex's and the two-prize rule. All in all, I believe this was a good decision. Hopefully they'll also errata Catcher to be Pow! Hand Extension and bring back Scramble Energy, Double Rainbow Energy, Castaway, Holon cards, etc. But that's really wishful thinking.
All of the new EX's have a huge amount HP. With Eviolite, the only popular card capable of knocking all of them out in one hit is Magnezone. This automatically makes almost all of them very playable, and some of the best cards in the format. Outside of Magnezone, the best way to beat the EX's is to run them. In general (with exceptions such as Durant), if everybody is running the same deck, the format becomes much more skill-based. My hope is that everything will simplify with the release of the next set, leaving the format with two types of decks: Eelektrik-based and basic beatdown. Both of these decks appear to be very skill-based, and generally go about 50-50 with each other.
The EX cards bring a risk-reward factor to the game that hasn't existed to the same extent since the last time we had ex's. They tried to do it with Legends, but the risk generally outweighed the reward. This factor should be great for the game, since it takes a lot of playing skill to manage the risk. I've lost many games in testing just by dropping Mewtwo-EX a turn early. I truly believe this coming format will be the most skill-based the game has seen since the rotation to HS-on.
Next Destinies is probably the most hyped set the game has ever seen. The big reason for the hype surrounding it is obviously the EX cards, but in particular Mewtwo-EX. This card has an amazing first attack and a godly 170HP. The card design behind Mewtwo is great, because it balances itself. If you attach more than two energy to a Mewtwo, you leave it open to being revenge killed by an opponent's Mewtwo. However, this forces each and every deck in the format to run Mewtwo because the card is simply too powerful if one player is using it and another isn't. I'll be doing a set analysis article very soon covering the rest of the playable cards in the set, but I wanted to give a special shout-out to Shaymin-EX. This is a late-game attacker in its truest form, which we rarely see. Shaymin simply can't be used early-game since it doesn't do enough damage and will probably be knocked out for two prizes right away. It's clearly designed to be used only in the late-game, which is great card design in my opinion. I'm sure it will see a lot of play as a tech.
A lot of people like the diversity in the HS-NV format, but I dislike how a lot of the decks function. Games against Truth are generally decided within the first three turns. Games against the dragons are generally decided by what deck you use and how hot they run. If Reshiram and Zekrom don't take a big prize lead early, they usually lose. CaKE is luck-based because of Electrode. I could go on, but that's just my view of the format. Many people will inevitably end up hating a basic-beatdown format. Unfortunately, it's impossible to please everybody.
Tips and Tricks
This article felt a little skimpy, so I decided to add a few general tips and tricks to wrap up.
Don't get cocky.
Players who think they're the best usually aren't even close to it. Most of you probably haven't seen me play in person, but those of you who have may have noticed that I never look comfortable. I'm always on edge. Even if I'm up three prizes against a "poke-mom" and have a full setup, I'm always looking to see if my opponent has a way out. If I catch it before they do, I generally have enough wiggle room to modify my strategy and make sure they can't come back. A player who goes up a couple prizes and assumes they have the win automatically puts them self at a great risk for losing.
I truly believe that the second you think you're better than somebody, you are more likely to make bad or risky decisions, and consequently more likely to lose the game. When I played as a Senior a few years ago, I was the Colorado player to beat. And I knew it. When I sat down to a match, I sat down thinking I would win. When I ended up being in a losing position, I usually wouldn't divert from my original game plan. I assumed my opponents would misplay their way into giving me a win, and this usually happened. However, in reality it was me misplaying by not making moves to put myself in a better position.
When I did lose, I would tilt instantly. I was terribly hard on myself. This would impact my decision making skills in future rounds. For this simple reason, I ended up having countless top cuts, but very few wins. I also believe this is the main reason I quit the game a few months later before I got to test my skills against out of state players in the "big" second half of the season. I just wasn't having fun anymore, because I was so worried about losing.
Coming back into the game last year, I had a much better attitude. This was not intentional, but I guess as I got older I better understood that I would lose some games. Pokémon is incredibly luck-based, so it's impossible to win every game, even if you're the best player in the world. This realization lead to me making better in-game decisions, playing better every round, and just enjoying myself more.
In Pokémon, it's very easy to dilute yourself. If you play chess and you lose a game, you know it's because your opponent played better than you. If you lose a game of Pokémon, luck has probably come into play in some way or another. There's no real way to know if you were outplayed or if you got unlucky. For the sake of self-improvement, it's best to assume you've been outplayed. Then, look for ways to avoid getting a similar loss in future rounds. I frequently hear players say, "my tournament finishes don't reflect my playing skill. I'm just unlucky in tournaments." Chances are that if you're saying this, you have a lot to improve on, even if you are somewhat unlucky. I even fall into this trap sometimes. When I got donked twice in a row at Cities, it was pretty frustrating. I kept complaining to my friends about how donks were illegitimate wins and how they were unfair. Honestly, I still can't think of anything I could have done better in those games since I never got to make a play. But it's very possible that's because I had a bad attitude about it.
Don't play to take the next prize. Play to win the game.
This is probably the one thing almost every player struggles with, or has struggled with at some point in their playing career. While Catchering that Magnemite for a free prize might let you take the lead in a game, it might not secure the win as well as conserving that Catcher and taking a bigger knockout this turn. Always rethink every move you make before doing it. Try to predict what the gamestate will look like a few turns later if you make the move, and if you don't make it.
A couple weeks ago at a Cities, I was playing against Isaiah M (I probably just butchered the spelling on that.) He's a great player, and we usually have pretty good games. If you haven't already, you should check out his YouTube channel, Fried Chicken N' Rice, where he and Tyler N record matches and do commentary on them.
Anyway, we were both using Eelzone. Early in the game, things went downhill for me quickly. I did a prize check on the first turn, revealing that one of my Eels was prized. The next turn, I played a Sage's Training and ended up having to decide between discarding a Tynamo or an Eelektrik. I opted to discard the Tynamo, since that at least gave me a chance at getting two Eels out this game. Discarding the Eelektrik would leave me with one Eel in my deck.
However, the next turn, he kills my Tynamo with a one-energy Lost Burn from his Magnezone (his build didn't use Thundurus, so he lacked a better early-game attacker.) This strands me with one Eelektrik for the whole game, and I haven't taken any prizes. The standard way to play this game would be to Catcher his Eels and hope he doesn't hit any Catchers or other cards to knock my last Eelektrik out.
However, it's quite obvious I'll lose if I do that. He has two Eels out to my one, and he's already up on prizes. Those Catchers need to be saved for later in the game, where they can be used for cheap one-energy kills. I won't be able to power a lot of heavy Lost Burns with just one Eelektrik.
Instead, I see an opening. He only has one Magnezone in play, and it's active. Furthermore, his only energy in play is on that Magnezone, and he only has about four cards in his hand. He does have a Magnemite benched, so it's possible he can get another Magnezone out. But even if he does, Lost Burning my active would once again leave him without energy on the field.
I'll be able to get two three-energy Lost Burns in the next two turns, but it will leave me without energy in play. This would put both of us on even footing, since it would also remove all of his energy from play. Chances are he'll take one more prize in the time I take two, so we would each be at four. However, he'll recover much faster with his two Eelektriks to my one. Still, with my Magnezones in play, I'll be able to draw my resources and he won't be able to. 140HP also means he can't OHKO my Magnezones if he doesn't have any of his own. This gives me great board control and prize denial if I can hit my Switches. These Magnezones also let me target the areas of his field he puts energy with Catcher and Lost Burn.
So, I opt to Lost Burn his active for the knock out. He does get another Magnezone out, but it goes as I planned where I remove it from play, leave both of us without energy on the field, but me with Magnezone and Magnetic Draw and him with just one extra Eelektrik. I don't remember how the next few turns play out, but I think he whiffs on the Switch, forcing him to sacrifice a Magneton or something to my Zekrom. He revenge kills with his Zekrom, but that gives me a cheap two energy Lost Burn to once again leave his field without energy. He's also whiffing on manual attachments while I'm hitting them because of Magnetic Draw.
I'm now at two prizes to his three and all I have to do is maintain this lead. It's my turn, and I'm taking a long time to think everything through. I can take a prize this turn, but I have one card left in my deck. So it's critical I seal the game next turn. I'm trying to figure out everything he can do, and I'm trying to remember if my last Catcher is the last card in my deck or if it's prized. This takes awhile, and the judge tells me to hurry up and make a move. I do the only sensible thing I can, which is Dynamotor. However, I'm rushing, and I stick the energy on Thundurus instead of on Eelektrik. I take the prize and have enough energy to win next turn, but he Catchers my energyless Eelektrik and I deck.
So, I diverted from my original strategy and came up with a gameplan that allowed me to take the win. However, one simple misplay on my part combined with him diverting from his original strategy allowed him to steal the win. In fairness to myself, I do believe that if I was given more time to think my turn through, I would have played the Dynamotor correctly. However, there's nothing you can do about those time limits.
In conclusion, it's important to check every action you do to make sure you're playing to win, not just mindlessly using the strategy that worked in your testing games.
Random result first.
This is just common sense, but I often see people who don't stick to this rule. Always play the cards with a reliable outcome last, so you can play your turn around an unfavorable outcome from unreliable cards. How (the order) you play your turn out is just as important as what you do on your turn.
For example, always use your Dynamotors after using Magnetic Draw. You know you can pull an energy from the discard with Dynamotor, but you have no idea what you'll draw off of Magnetic Draw. It might seem like a great play to Lost Burn and KO their active. However, if you draw five energy off Magnetic Draw, you might not want to risk losing your only Magnezone without a good way to draw cards.
Some less noticeable examples include using Sage's Training, Dual Ball, even a turn one Pokémon Collector, before using your manual attachment. Whiffing on the Dual Ball or drawing a Switch off the Sage might change where that attachment goes. I still make these types of mistakes sometimes, just because I dislike playing those risky cards in the first place.
However, there are times where it makes sense to do the opposite. In the event you have a choice to make, it's always best to do everything that could modify your choice before making it. For example, if you're using Typhlosion/Reshiram, always use Roast Reveal before playing a Sage's Training, even though Roast Reveal has the more guaranteed outcome. The cards you draw off the Roast might modify what you choose to discard with Sage. Obviously play your Afterburners after doing all of this in case you draw exceptionally well/badly.
Thinning the deck vs resource conservation.
This could very well be the hardest thing about playing. During each game, a player should be focused on discarding cards they don't need anymore. This improves the chances of drawing what you do need.
A great example of this is a hand on the first or second turn with Pokémon Communication, Magnezone, and Professor Juniper. The worst play is to just use Juniper. This discards one of your Magnezones, which you need to get out as quickly as possible. An average play is to use Pokémon Communication to put Magnezone back into the deck, then take nothing back out before using the Juniper. The best play is to Communicate for something like a Cleffa that you don't need for the rest of the game and then use Juniper to discard it. If you didn't discard the Cleffa and it was in the top seven cards of your deck, you would draw have drawn it with Juniper instead of drawing a possibly more valuable card.
However, play enough games, and you'll start to second guess yourself. I've lost many games by playing too recklessly and discarding cards I end up needing later. Games can take unpredictable turns, and it may turn out you do need the Cleffa after all. Therefore, it's impossible to put a "number" on when a card should be burned and when it should be conserved. For example, it may seem like a great play to burn a Dual Ball for nothing before playing Professor Oak's New Theory. However, if you end up desperately needing a basic later, conserving that Dual Ball could have won you the game.
This interaction between deck size and resources is something all players should be aware of and constantly thinking about while playing.
Conclusion
While playtesting for States, keep all of my playing tips in mind. They're bound to help a lot of players out. Also, be on the look out for my next couple articles. Anybody attending a Prerelease or going to States can benefit from them. Thanks for reading, and feel free to leave comments.
