Discussion Judge Reprint

[crystal_pidgeot]

@crystal_pidgeot

I've gone back and forth over things like hand disruption and "tool box" style effects and the main thing I believe it boils down to is:

Are both players still able to have fun without being significantly better human beings than most?

If the game becomes one-sided in short order because even when we adjust for things like skill and luck, one deck just doesn't leave the opposition enough options, it is a problem. If there are so many variables outside of my control that I can't take credit for my victories or my losses, I also don't find myself enjoying the game as much, if at all. Why have a "TCG" when we could just have Pokémon themed coins to flip for who wins or similarly themed dice to roll off? Not with effects or rules on them: just a standard heads/tails coin or six-sided (well, all the same amount of sides) die. At that point all the skill becomes "external elements" and the RNG is blatant. Or if we still want a variety of cards with Pokémon on them... just create Pokémon themed trading cards. We'll just play a game of War and shock of shocks, Legendary Pokémon only show up on "face" cards.

Kind of veering far off topic here, but this is what goes through my head as I see "Oh, something else that reduces dependence on long time skills like proper hand cultivation, without an appropriate cost to my opponent for using it."

Yeah, I agree with this. I want to see more skilled games. When I see someone win with Quaking Punch and that player acts like they actually did something to deserve the win, I cringe. Part of the reason I stay away from cards like that is because they aren't healthy for a game and if this means I don't win or make me a scrub, then so be it. I don't feel like I won if I took away 60% or more of my opponents options from turn one of the game. I don't think effects like this are bad for the game but they are too easy to achieve. I feel that Giratina EX does this right. it removes options but not in such a way to where it becomes intrusive. You can still play your game and the disruption, while it will set you back, it doesn't completely take you out of the game.

I would like to see less flippy cards but I feel there has to be some element of risk reward in the game and these cards make or can make decks different, and they tend affect player preference but there are way to many ways you can lose when its not your fault. In other TCGs, you can make counter plays to make attempts to stop an opponents play. In Pokemon, when your opponent plays a crushing hammer, you can't do anything but hope it lands tails, which is a design flaw of the card.

When I make any cards, I think of two things and that;

1. How effective is this card
2. Do counter plays exist for this card

TO be honest, I rather have a 50 or 60 card set with well balanced cards rather than sets that have over 100 cards with only 12 good ones.

 

[MarshalBry]

When I see someone win with Quaking Punch and that player acts like they actually did something to deserve the win, I cringe. Part of the reason I stay away from cards like that is because they aren't healthy for a game and if this means I don't win or make me a scrub, then so be it. I don't feel like I won if I took away 60% or more of my opponents options from turn one of the game. I don't think effects like this are bad for the game but they are too easy to achieve. I feel that Giratina EX does this right. it removes options but not in such a way to where it becomes intrusive. You can still play your game and the disruption, while it will set you back, it doesn't completely take you out of the game.

I'd personally like to see cards like Seismitoad EX and Giratina EX where perhaps they're as easy to get going as Toad (i.e. requiring only one double colorless) but affect both the opponent's hand and your hand as well as a downside so you have to actually build your deck decently around the card as opposed to running it as a one-of tech that can be called out at any situation in just about any deck (referring to Toad, not Giratina).

 

[crystal_pidgeot]

I'd personally like to see cards like Seismitoad EX and Giratina EX where perhaps they're as easy to get going as Toad (i.e. requiring only one double colorless) but affect both the opponent's hand and your hand as well as a downside so you have to actually build your deck decently around the card as opposed to running it as a one-of tech that can be called out at any situation in just about any deck (referring to Toad, not Giratina).

The reason I dont like Seismitoad EX is because it has built in protection as well. Turning off items for 1 or both players makes that Pokemon stronger because the opponent can't play ways to damage it. Muscle Band is turned off, Energy Switch is turned off, etc. The ability is also extremely harsh to decks that can't stop it. Whether or not it affects both players, the ability to turn off items is way too free.

I never liked the argument that "you have to build around the card" because all decks do this, and tend to build around a specific card. Even though these decks are built to support a Pokemon, they can have their game destroyed by the lock and if the lock isn't a factor, these decks don't have build in defense in the same way as toad EX.

I want to see game move away from lock based defense to card base defense. I do feel these cards have a place in the format but Trainer Lock has been in the format since HGSS Block and I'm ready for it to go away.

 

[MarshalBry]

The reason I dont like Seismitoad EX is because it has built in protection as well. Turning off items for 1 or both players makes that Pokemon stronger because the opponent can't play ways to damage it. Muscle Band is turned off, Energy Switch is turned off, etc. The ability is also extremely harsh to decks that can't stop it. Whether or not it affects both players, the ability to turn off items is way too free.

I never liked the argument that "you have to build around the card" because all decks do this, and tend to build around a specific card. Even though these decks are built to support a Pokemon, they can have their game destroyed by the lock and if the lock isn't a factor, these decks don't have build in defense in the same way as toad EX.

I want to see game move away from lock based defense to card base defense. I do feel these cards have a place in the format but Trainer Lock has been in the format since HGSS Block and I'm ready for it to go away.

I do agree that item lock is far too strong of a lock as items are way too crucial to your turn; I've had so many times against a Toad EX where I've had a hand full of items and thought "oh I can just use that- no wait, it's an item card". I quite liked Giratina's approach of blocking Stadiums and Special Energies and Tools instead; although there's more things being blocked you don't feel as limited as those aren't played nearly as often and things like Special Energies can typically be worked around by using standard energies instead. As well, depending what Stadium you use, you may have an alternative there too (i.e. Potion/Pokémon Center Lady etc. instead of Rough Seas).

 

[crystal_pidgeot]

I do agree that item lock is far too strong of a lock as items are way too crucial to your turn; I've had so many times against a Toad EX where I've had a hand full of items and thought "oh I can just use that- no wait, it's an item card". I quite liked Giratina's approach of blocking Stadiums and Special Energies and Tools instead; although there's more things being blocked you don't feel as limited as those aren't played nearly as often and things like Special Energies can typically be worked around by using standard energies instead. As well, depending what Stadium you use, you may have an alternative there too (i.e. Potion/Pokémon Center Lady etc. instead of Rough Seas).

Adding to the stadium thing, Paint Roller is also an option at removing in play stadiums your opponent may control. That lock isn't intrusive because there are still options available the players while under the lock. No one like losing because they can't play their deck. Cards or effects that punish actual mechanics of the game should be looked at and scrutinized before they release to the public. I'm glad they are looking at ban list as an serious option so I hope that keeps the card makers in check.

 

[Yo-yos]

Like any card game they will release set cards for people to play in a competitive sense, it's when people abuse the privilege of playing set cards things like early rotation or a ban list comes into effect. And just because we think something may be broken but doesn't do as well as you think it will doesn't make it broken overall.

I have only looked at Judge as one thing, an anti-hand. Decks like hawlucha/meinshao or vileplume where they just hold massive hand sizes and lose options for the win because they need that many cards in hand for it, so at a time where in standard we have multiple hand draw options judge now confines it to one overall.

 

[Otaku]

^Wrong. Like any card game they will release set cards for people to play in a competitive sense, it's when people abuse the privilege of playing set cards things like early rotation or a ban list comes into effect. And just because we think something may be broken but doesn't do as well as you think it will doesn't make it broken overall, it just makes you a sore loser to not come up with a valid strategy to out play your opponent because your not willing to out play your opponent.

Just because you say something doesn't make it so. For starters, if you want to attack people's character by writing off complaints as people who just aren't playing the game right, how about the reverse issue: people who do well at this game are at least rewarded with the thrill of victory and that is a real, chemical thing in your brain. Throw in prize support and/or accolades and you've got a situation where even if something is not good, a person has incentive to proclaim it as good because he or she is getting something out of it. How can we trust someone like that for neutral analysis? If anything its a bit like asking an addict if whatever they are addicted to is good; only the ones far enough along are going to admit "No, this is a problem. I may enjoy it but it isn't good for me."

Earlier I explained why in a two player game, it is important for the two players to enjoy themselves. I mean, even if we don't worry about both players having fun, there are just easier ways to do a two-player game than something this elaborate. ¬_¬ That is an important aspect of "game balance" and "broken" as well as "filler" cards.

Just because a card can be countered does not make it balanced. Are there any cards that do not have some kind of counter? Lysandre's Trump Card is a Supporter, so supporter blocking effects stop it. Shiftry (NXD) can't affect Pokémon with Θ Stop. That doesn't mean these cards are balanced.

The Pokémon Trading Card Game has three reasons for people to buy it:

• Wanting Pokémon
• Wanting trading cards
• Wanting a card game

Regardless of which one is provides the most profit for the Pokémon TCG, it is interesting to note that of these three, some are less binding than others. You have to significantly downplay (if not completely remove) Pokémon from the game so that people that just want to buy "something Pokémon" stop getting their periodic booster pack. For those focused on trading, it is a bit more demanding but not too much; for all the changes that have happened with trading cards, the fundamentals are still the same. It is when it comes to making it a game that it starts to require some serious effort to do well, and where things that might be fine for the first two cause problems for the last one... however most of what can be done for the last one won't cause a problem with the first two.

It comes down to what kind of person the-powers-that-be wish to target with the game. If there was no interest in people looking for a game, this could just be Pokémon trading cards (which already exist, don't they?). Way less expensive than paying people to design a game, let alone sponsoring organized play. So actually the entire set needs to be relevant for competitive play. Everyone likes different things about Pokémon; those here just for the TCG just get to enjoy whatever happens. Those of us here for Pokémon and/or a TCG want cards worth trading around and cards worth using to play. Most sets are full of filler on both accounts.

TL;DR: Be careful not to write people off based on your assumptions; they can do it right back, sometimes with better reasoning than you. Just because something can be countered doesn't make it balanced and it certainly doesn't make it fun, and people here are annoyed because the competitive game is also becoming less and less enjoyable for them. We are looking at game mechanics and asking "Why should that be fun?" "Does that really promote strategy and if so, at what cost?" I add that last bit because I do see skill, strategy, etc. being encouraged, but only certain ones, with a net loss overall.

 

[crystal_pidgeot]

^Wrong. Like any card game they will release set cards for people to play in a competitive sense, it's when people abuse the privilege of playing set cards things like early rotation or a ban list comes into effect. And just because we think something may be broken but doesn't do as well as you think it will doesn't make it broken overall, it just makes you a sore loser to not come up with a valid strategy to out play your opponent because your not willing to out play your opponent.

I have only looked at Judge as one thing, an anti-hand. Decks like hawlucha/meinshao or vileplume where they just hold massive hand sizes and lose options for the win because they need that many cards in hand for it, so at a time where in standard we have multiple hand draw options judge now confines it to one overall.

Players will play whatever is released to them. There isn't any consequences to playing an expanded Toad EX in Expanded. Even without Trump Card, the deck is still a very good deck and something I could consider tier 0. There isn't any abuse here because TPC hasn't done anything to prevent its use outside of rotation, which isn't anytime soon. An early rotation is the wrong way of dealing with this because it removes a lot of cards from the game just to ban 1 card, rather than banning that 1 card.

Broken is a subjective term because its something we can't agree on. There are people who think Toad EX isn't broken. I, however believe it is because of how strong the lock is on a Pokemon with 180 HP. Where did this sore loser thing come from? This sounds a lot like salt to me... Do you want an example? Lets say I go second and manage to Quaking Punch my opponent and maintain the lock for the whole game, in which I end up winning. What options does my opponent to end that lock that doesn't put them at like -4?

The problem with Pokemon, both the TGC and VGC is there are too many over-dominate strategies that can't be challenged in any way. How do you outplay Night March for example or an opponent who got a turn one Archie's Blastoise and Keldeo. What do you do if you're Judged into an unplayable hand and go like 7 turns without an supporter? In other card games, since we're comparing it to others now, and effect that completely removes mechanics from an player usually come at some kind of cost to activate. In Yugioh, Imperial Order was banned because of how it interacted with Spell cards. A single trap card that prevents the use of all spell cards was a game ender, in the same way Item lock is. Hand disruption is just too easy, in the same way they keep making X-Ball like attacks because why make new cards right?

Instead, why not make card that serve as a mode of defense to challenge staples? I like how Paint Roller was designed. Simple discard a in play stadium card and draw. Its not too good or too bad. It has perfect balance and gives an option to counter stadiums. I like to play 5 stadiums in my decks but now I can play 3 Stadiums, 2 Paint Rollers or 3 Paint Rollers and 2 stadiums. Since a lot of decks don't benefit for using any stadium, they have this option to remove them. The game could be much better if more cards like this were designed.

 

[poke4trade]

Honestly, I believe judge might over power the format. Between judge and red card there is a strong potential that players will be unable to plan their next move. Satisfying strategy games allow the player to plan a strategy and then implement it. With these card in the format, you could be forced to change your strategy every turn. I believe to have one in the format is fine. However, having two, plus a pokemon that works as N, will annoy a bit.

I'm not a fan of the card because I believe there will be some over abuse of it once players catch on to its power. I also think it will force more supporters and shaymins ($$) into the hand so that draw support will be there once Judged. This in turn will decrease the amount of VS Seekers players run in the deck and create a stronger meta for switching decks. But that is just my Hypothesis.

 

[Brave Vesperia]

Everyone, this thread is going off topic with all the fighting and whatnot. Please stick to discussing Judge, and what it effects. I have deleted a few posts already and will be handing out some warnings if I see this continuing.