Hydrapple ex, Stellar Lapras ex, Briar, and More Revealed from “Stellar Miracle!”

[afr1234]

Alll I'll say is that some people do have in fact fun even when losing. I see this claim that "not winning=no fun" all the time in all sorts of different games. Not everyone takes losing the same way, not everyone considers/defines what's fun the exact same way as you do

Losing every time isn't fun when it is one sided. When its close, is different, but i can't see anyone having fun losing badly every day.

Just because there might be someone that loves playing janky decks and losing a lot, doesn't invalidate the argument. Generalizations exist for a reason

 

[koala cub]

There's quite a few points of bickering going on in the comments. Just to break down some thoughts:

If you are breaking down how a deck plays out from newer cards, I definitely recommend doing a rough idea of how the deck plays out in its first few turns, how that stacks up as a deck, and what can be done to impede the deck along the way. Koala cub comparing the deck's output to Darkrai, and afr breaking down what you need to hit a damage benchmark, are the closest things to reasonable that were drawn up for Hydrapple here. You don't have to invent a competitive deck, but you can still take the idea to learn up fundamentals and teach others where a card or deck might fall short by playing it out. Saying "Card is good" or "Card is bad" without much other reasoning is not helpful if your audience in talk doesn't understand why, and then that ends up helping no one in the long run or even the short run of it.

You also have to acknowledge that the set it is involved in is incomplete info, and you should value how much time you put into the idea at hand. There is use in doing this if you want to learn or teach what to look out for in cards, but it also isn't the best practice to treat it like a defacto format. Prioritize the format you are focusing on, and leave other or incomplete formats secondary for if you have the time to discuss.

Saying you don't want to play a deck strictly because it is part of the incrowd is, like mentioned before, not a healthy mindset. That's like saying you don't like a vegetable without ever tasting it. More specific reasons that people often bring up are something like:
"I don't want to play this deck because the mirror isn't good or fun"
"I don't want to play this deck to locals because it has a bad matchup against X and I see X all the time at locals"
"I cannot play this deck because it is outside what I budget for the game"
"I don't want to play this deck in a competitive environment because I don't have experience playing this type of deck yet"
"I want to play a deck featuring my favorite pokemon"
"I want to play this deck because I feel it is favorable into my locals"
"I want to learn this deck, but let me stick to online with it until I get a better understanding of it."

You need to adjust your mindset for what location and level of play you want out of the game. Saying "I don't want to be a meta sheep" is a pretty poor reason for eliminating a deck from what you might find fun... because it doesn't actually say anything other than you don't want to follow what other people you see on the internet do. No one cares about that except you. You won't be judged except by people with just as poor or poorer mindset about that. Keep your options open until you learn what you want. You can build to a less successful idea if you enjoy that particular pokemon; you can build to a deck that is less common that might have an advantage over specific decks; you can build to a standard successful deck and make slight adjustments to give you an edge. The purpose no matter how you add it up is to get better overall, learn, and have fun doing it.

i completely agree. to be clear, i still love playing non-meta cards, not every card has to be playable, and there could be upcoming cards that significantly buff hydrapple ex. it's just a matter of that i really want hydrapple ex to have more valuable traits, and i want grass-type decks to be viable on a competitive level.

if hydrapple ex had a different form of energy acceleration (i.e. rillaboom's search for 2 energy ability), or a synergistic stage 1 card, or a stronger attack (maybe 40 plus 40?), i could have seen it being very solid.

 

[Alex Hesketh]

Losing every time isn't fun when it is one sided. When its close, is different, but i can't see anyone having fun losing badly every day.

Just because there might be someone that loves playing janky decks and losing a lot, doesn't invalidate the argument. Generalizations exist for a reason

There you go again defining fun for all by your own definition. Generalization is bad when all proof we have is our own experience and quite limited pov only. I personally dont think Hydrapple is good but it is a far cry from being a deck where you lose badly that constant

 

[afr1234]

There you go again defining fun for all by your own definition. Generalization is bad when all proof we have is our own experience and quite limited pov only. I personally dont think Hydrapple is good but it is a far cry from being a deck where you lose badly that constant

You are doing the same. You are making a defintion based on potential exceptions you CAN'T PROVE. I can prove the playerbase is getting more competitive by just looking at attendance numbers at regionals, points gotten per player at leagues, etc.

You cannot do the opposite. But is safe to assume it isn't large. How many people with bad decks you see nowadays at leagues?

Not many. Everyone i see in the two leagues i play in every week is playing meta. Is very rare when someone is playing bad decks like tsareena or incinerorar (which are the ones i have played against). My last 10 league matches have been vs 3x bolt, 2x zard, 4x garde and 1x future.

Hydrapple is a deck that would get outclassed by even the rogue decks we have atm (gholdengo, dialga, etc). It will result in close to 0/1-X records with what we know so far of next set. Only winnable MU's would be vs stuff like zard that you can ohko with less set-up.

Can someone enjoy losing that Much? Yes. Is People enjoying such scenarios a lot? Doubt so. We would see more bad decks at local tournaments and we don't see that many, just the odd guy here and there.

 

[tol89]

I play every week, never played meta. Personally I think, playing one of five decks everyone else plays or playing against the same stupid deck every round is worse than losing. Like if you win with one of those is nothing you achieved but just one player at a tournament and you copy that. It’s just no fun.

 

[Octowen]

*reads Lapras translation*
“haha 20 funny typo”
*looks over at actual card*
Wat

On a side note, who’s ready for Tera Pokémon to be blisteringly OP, including energy acceleration and extra prize draw?

 

[angooseburger]

I play every week, never played meta. Personally I think, playing one of five decks everyone else plays or playing against the same stupid deck every round is worse than losing. Like if you win with one of those is nothing you achieved but just one player at a tournament and you copy that. It’s just no fun.

idk about you but 5 different decks in a tournament/weekly is very diverse already. You're playing probably 4-5 rounds so it's likely you play a different deck each time.

 

[Alex Hesketh]

You are doing the same. You are making a defintion based on potential exceptions you CAN'T PROVE. I can prove the playerbase is getting more competitive by just looking at attendance numbers at regionals, points gotten per player at leagues, etc.

You cannot do the opposite. But is safe to assume it isn't large. How many people with bad decks you see nowadays at leagues?

Not many. Everyone i see in the two leagues i play in every week is playing meta. Is very rare when someone is playing bad decks like tsareena or incinerorar (which are the ones i have played against). My last 10 league matches have been vs 3x bolt, 2x zard, 4x garde and 1x future.

Hydrapple is a deck that would get outclassed by even the rogue decks we have atm (gholdengo, dialga, etc). It will result in close to 0/1-X records with what we know so far of next set. Only winnable MU's would be vs stuff like zard that you can ohko with less set-up.

Can someone enjoy losing that Much? Yes. Is People enjoying such scenarios a lot? Doubt so. We would see more bad decks at local tournaments and we don't see that many, just the odd guy here and there.

Wow all those jpn players and TCGLive players all ceased to exist, (I mention jpn players bc I can bet you have seen winning results of decks you will absolutely consider garbage, I understand the Bo1 scenario so spare the explanation). I personally wouldnt call Gholdengo tier decks "rogue" in the slightest they still enter the meta realm they appear in regionals and a rise in their power level is always something to be on the lookout for.

You can say the competitive scene has grown absolutely yes, but the entire TCG community has grown, more collectors as well as more casual players. You really can't prove the competitive sphere has grown alone. Now if I were to personally play irl ofc it'd be more enticing to play a meta deck, I can play 50+ decks for *free* online, I cant do that physically, as cheap as Pokemon tcg might be. No wonder you wont see off meta decks that commonly in leagues, it's common sense my guy.

 

[Grim Thoughts]

Like this post. I’m not even interested in the top decks because everyone is playing them and I don’t want to. Like how boring can you be. Try something beside Charizard please

it really shouldn't need saying, but a card doesn't have to be in a BDIF list in order to be a good or useful card. reevaluate your priorities when it comes to analyzing new cards, and examine the game through a more reasonable lens. it's a much healthier way to engage with a children's card game, i find. there will always be "bad cards", no one is denying that, but some folks seem to approach news posts like these with staggering levels of pessimism and dismissiveness around anything that doesn't serve a direct use to whatever the top 6 decks on limitlesstcg are at a given moment, and that's really just not even useful or insightful analysis from a meta-oriented perspective either.

(they aren't suggesting one run Hydrapple Ogerpon, by the way)

All I meant with my comment was that the card is not great. Please don’t take one offhanded comment and use it to infer I have a specific mentality you have a problem with. I have never played Charizard and in fact stay away from the BDIF because I do personally find it somewhat boring to play something that’s everywhere and that I’m constantly facing against anyways, but it’s not like it’s a problem if I did; people play the best decks in competitive because it’s a competitive scene and some people care a lot (maybe a bit too much) about winning, simple as that

There's quite a few points of bickering going on in the comments. Just to break down some thoughts:

If you are breaking down how a deck plays out from newer cards, I definitely recommend doing a rough idea of how the deck plays out in its first few turns, how that stacks up as a deck, and what can be done to impede the deck along the way. Koala cub comparing the deck's output to Darkrai, and afr breaking down what you need to hit a damage benchmark, are the closest things to reasonable that were drawn up for Hydrapple here. You don't have to invent a competitive deck, but you can still take the idea to learn up fundamentals and teach others where a card or deck might fall short by playing it out. Saying "Card is good" or "Card is bad" without much other reasoning is not helpful if your audience in talk doesn't understand why, and then that ends up helping no one in the long run or even the short run of it.

You also have to acknowledge that the set it is involved in is incomplete info, and you should value how much time you put into the idea at hand. There is use in doing this if you want to learn or teach what to look out for in cards, but it also isn't the best practice to treat it like a defacto format. Prioritize the format you are focusing on, and leave other or incomplete formats secondary for if you have the time to discuss.

Saying you don't want to play a deck strictly because it is part of the incrowd is, like mentioned before, not a healthy mindset. That's like saying you don't like a vegetable without ever tasting it. More specific reasons that people often bring up are something like:
"I don't want to play this deck because the mirror isn't good or fun"
"I don't want to play this deck to locals because it has a bad matchup against X and I see X all the time at locals"
"I cannot play this deck because it is outside what I budget for the game"
"I don't want to play this deck in a competitive environment because I don't have experience playing this type of deck yet"
"I want to play a deck featuring my favorite pokemon"
"I want to play this deck because I feel it is favorable into my locals"
"I want to learn this deck, but let me stick to online with it until I get a better understanding of it."

You need to adjust your mindset for what location and level of play you want out of the game. Saying "I don't want to be a meta sheep" is a pretty poor reason for eliminating a deck from what you might find fun... because it doesn't actually say anything other than you don't want to follow what other people you see on the internet do. No one cares about that except you. You won't be judged except by people with just as poor or poorer mindset about that. Keep your options open until you learn what you want. You can build to a less successful idea if you enjoy that particular pokemon; you can build to a deck that is less common that might have an advantage over specific decks; you can build to a standard successful deck and make slight adjustments to give you an edge. The purpose no matter how you add it up is to get better overall, learn, and have fun doing it.

Completely agree. My first impressions are that the card is just outclassed, and I stated my reasons for thinking that, and I hope to be proven wrong because I want Hydrapple to be genuinely good. In fact, the main reason I was so pessimistic in my post is because I was so disappointed that it has anti-synergy as an evolution to Dipplin. They had potential to make it such an interesting and unique card, but instead made it one of the most generic attackers with one of the most generic abilities, even if it isn’t half bad as a card. The Applin line is the only line that splits into three, which then has only one of the split paths evolving again. Hydrapple is a big worm hydra with eight personalities that live in a candy apple, this could have been so much more than a heal 30 attach, which is just a disappointing effect even if it synergizes nicely with the attack, and an energy-specific Powerful Storm, which has already been done so much as an attack that it’s really not special, even if it’s decently powerful if you’re able to set it up.

The second part of this comment really speaks to me. I see people too often caught up in a winning mentality where they have to play what’s meta, and also contrarians who oppose that, but I feel like the mentality of choosing decks because they’re meta is a reductionist one that will cause you to have a lot less fun with the game, even in competitive (though it kinda becomes necessary at the highest-level of competitive, like regionals, internationals, and worlds if you want a shot at winning. But you could also just go to have fun and experience it and that’s fine too). And while this is my opinion, I’m not gonna judge people for how they want to play the game, even if I think some people would have a lot more fun if they just played what was actually fun to them. The way I have fun is refining a third-tier deck, making weird additions and changes to deal with the meta and make it more consistent, and then try beating meta decks or at least getting close, but my personal favorite way to play is undoubtedly much different than a lot of people’s

 

[Charmaster:)]

I wouldn't underestimate Blissey ex as a candidate for this item. Who knows what Stellar ex Pokemon they may print in the future with strong attacks hindered by an awkward energy cost. Blissey allows for them to effectively use this item thanks to it's built in Energy Switch.

Are people still using Cornerstone Mask Ogerpon ex in Blissey Munkidori? Are people still using Munkidori? I really am behind on the times.

The glass trumpet. Both terapagos and also raging bolt will be even stronger with a few of those

Suddenly Squawkabilly ex is a contributing member of the team after turn 1. I could see someone testing different counts of Glass Trumpet in that deck. Then again, perhaps the deck has gone beyond needing it at this point and you'd be better off with a different item.

 

[tol89]

idk about you but 5 different decks in a tournament/weekly is very diverse already. You're playing probably 4-5 rounds so it's likely you play a different deck each time.

During one week, maybe. But I’ve been playing against the same Decks for month. There was a time I only played against either Lost Box or Charizard for a few weeks in a row. People that do that are just boring to me, gave up after the first round mostly, even if I won that one.

 

[Icebox]

In before no SIR, just FA

Sorry, i had to try

Wouldn't doubt it but with the Loyal 3 getting alts and Ogerpon getting 4, I have a hard time believing Hydrapple will be left out. It’s pretty popular in game too iirc

 

[afr1234]

Wow all those jpn players and TCGLive players all ceased to exist, (I mention jpn players bc I can bet you have seen winning results of decks you will absolutely consider garbage, I understand the Bo1 scenario so spare the explanation). I personally wouldnt call Gholdengo tier decks "rogue" in the slightest they still enter the meta realm they appear in regionals and a rise in their power level is always something to be on the lookout for.

You can say the competitive scene has grown absolutely yes, but the entire TCG community has grown, more collectors as well as more casual players. You really can't prove the competitive sphere has grown alone. Now if I were to personally play irl ofc it'd be more enticing to play a meta deck, I can play 50+ decks for *free* online, I cant do that physically, as cheap as Pokemon tcg might be. No wonder you wont see off meta decks that commonly in leagues, it's common sense my guy.

Gholdengo lacks representation to have more precise data, but even the data we have, puts it on par with tier 3 decks which isn't far from rogue and is usually reserved for popular & massively underperforming decks or overperforming rogue decks.

Regardless, not all rogue decks are made equal, some have potential like blissey, arceus or gouging fire, some need more cards but have some fundamentals like tsareena, united wings or festival and some are never going to be good like torterra, meowscarada or tyranitar ex.

And Japanese results are funny. They aren't quite representative for a multitude of reasons, they have different metas from ours and develop the meta before we can even try the cards. Dragapult was born "dead" in this side of the world when in the first weeks it seemed like a tier 0 deck.

Also, they do a bunch of weird stuff that not always translates.

-------
Ref NAIC's data:

Tier 1
Snorlax 7 players 10.71 points per player
Gardevoir: 62 players 9.7 points per player

Tier 2
Charizard: 13 players 9 points per player
Lost box: 43 players 8.69 points per player
Chien pao: 10 players 8.3 points per player
Ancient box: 5 players 8.2 points per player

Tier 3
Bolt: 35 players 5.91 points per player
Pult: 20 players 5.75 points per player
Miraidon: 18 players 5.22 points per player
Lugia: 46 players 5.17 points per player
Tina: 7 players 5.14 points per player
Decks with volatile data
Regidrago: 4 players 10 points per player
Future box: 4 players10 points per player
Gholdengo: 3 players 6 points per player
Thorns: 3 players 6 points per player
Pidgeot control: 5 players 4.4 points per player
Diaga: 2 players 2.5 points per player
Greninja: 1 player 8 points per player
Roaring moon: 1 player 5 points per player

 

[Gugasauro]

I just need a Hydrapple ex alt art. Please Pokemon, make it happen (Oswaldo KATO artwork would me perfect)!

 

[Bishlarp]

hydrapple ex is the first time a card's lack of viability has actively made me salty LOL

i love hydrapple and was hoping for a great card but this is worse than ogerpon ex in pretty much every way

grass types still don't have a viable engine

Are you high, king? What are you talking about? It's a free grass attach and free healing, which....is very rare. Name all the cards in standard that heal and are good. I can't think of any besides maybe cook, but you're using your 1 supporter for a turn so even 70 hp isn't worth it. Keep in mind that hydrapple attaches grass energy...to any Pokemon, not just Ogerpon. You can easily attach a grass to ogerpon, AND draw a card, AND you're able to heal it at no cost. And you don't even need to use ogerpon to attack, it'd be completely conceivable to use Hydrapple's attack that's further boosted by ogerpon having the ability to attach to itself (which is, by far, less desirable on its own), but you also draw a card and have the option to heal. That's just in standard, that's not even counting expanded which lets you use net ball, turffield, that venusaur from sun and moon with that one ability, cherrim from swsh, dhelmise...in fact, I personally would LOVE if this hydrapple, ogerpon and dhelmise vmax became a top 5 expanded deck. That would make my grass-type loving heart just soar

 

[koala cub]

Are you high, king?

first off, i'm not a king lol

second off, check my other comment for reference. the TLDR is that hydrapple ex is a stage 2 pokemon that can only attach 1 extra energy per turn, which makes it EXTREMELY slow relative to the infinite acceleration provided by good stage 2's like gardevoir ex & baxcalibur.