Worlds is definitely a much harder tournament than nats. At nats you are pretty much guaranteed to play a few rounds against amateur or worse players, which puts you at 3/4-0, meaning that you can go about 3-3 against top players and still make cut. At worlds you play against top players all 7 rounds no matter what. You have to go at least 5-2 against top players instead of 3-3, which is much harder. 5-2 doesn't even guarantee top at worlds anymore. I went 5-2 losing my last round this year and I didn't make it. Worlds is uncomparable to nationals as far as difficulty goes.
Lack of Drawpower
- Thread starter scizorlicious
- Start date
Skill level of players at the two tournaments is not comparable at all, no. My first worlds, I was absolutely amazed at the quality of the decks, going 4-3 and basically getting my butt kicked three games in a row. After that, I was more prepared.
On the other hand, the chances of the event being won by the most skilled player in the tournament is also not comparable. There is a reason we've had a two-time world champion and not a two-time national champion. As for worlds not being a top 32, that's one of the worst decisions that the company has ever made and it does screw with my points a lot. I'm assuming they'll go back to top 32 next year or there will be some pretty upset players.
On the other hand, the chances of the event being won by the most skilled player in the tournament is also not comparable. There is a reason we've had a two-time world champion and not a two-time national champion. As for worlds not being a top 32, that's one of the worst decisions that the company has ever made and it does screw with my points a lot. I'm assuming they'll go back to top 32 next year or there will be some pretty upset players.
I think that this format is challenging enough, because it is good thing for myself too. That's sometimes good when people do not have enough drawpower. Things are different of course when you 3 Junipers and 4 PONTs. And really, it's not even slow to get needed cards into hand ^^ Cheren is also pretty good idea, because people do not play Bill, which draws only 2 cards instead of 3 
^lol. So funny. But true. Drawpower is a lot worse. So use decks that can set up with little drawpower.
~SS
~SS
Musharna is coming out soon and gives OK draw power, but with catcher...
Zeki/n/Reshi23 said:
You really think that Pokemon Catcher is going to stop us from using the first good draw power we're getting in the HGSS-on format? People are so eager for draw power that they'll use pretty much anything at this point. Heck, I know that I'll be stocking Musharna for now.
I love how everyone is forgetting Noctowl. Remeber people, Musharna only give one card, just like Noctowl. Sure, with Musharna you can choose between top two, but keep in mind you have to put the other card on the bottom of your deck so if both cards are good Musharna is worse than Noctowl. Also, Noctowl has a manageable retreat, making it better than Musharna in a format with Catcher. So if Noctowl sucks so badly, I think Musharna won't be any better.
But you're forgetting that the choice between two cards is significantly better than just getting 1. Remember Bill? The least-considered Supporter in HGSS-on? Well, Cheren draws 1 extra card and instantly became good. While you don't get the extra card with Musharna, the choice is what matters. And since both cards are Catcher-fodder, the Retreat Cost doesn't make a huge difference (they'd be KO'd most likely regardless). That little difference in text makes a big difference in playability.
Too much drawpower makes the game unbalanced.
Games in Base - Gym were vomitive to say the least because of this very reason.
"turn 1 erika bill item finder erika misty's wrath erika lt surge's treaty computer search Impostor Oak's Revenge Rocket's Sneak Attack Rocket's Trap heads a Lightning on Rocket's Zapdos Plasma 20 you turn."
*opponent draw an energy card*
"good game."
Cheren is also bad and it always has been. The retreat cost is HUGE. It can't attack in the majority of decks, so they'll just Catcher it up and snipe around it or stall out till time or deck you. People do this successfully with Phanpy, Donphan, Bouffalant and Magnezone - this card is even worse than all of those as far as what it can do in the active. I'd never KO this card after you play it if I was smart. It's not even that good of draw. Running 4 Oak's and 3 Juniper > running 2-2 Musharna and 3 Switch.Scizorliscious said:
Right but it's just 1 extra card. That Musharna or Munna could have been an extra copy of whatever you get with its power. If it had a free retreat I'd be taking a much closer look at it. With 1 retreat, it might have a niche role in the meta. But the stalling your opponent gets with a 2+ retreat card on the bench that can't attack is just too risky. Vileplume and Gothitelle already have Tropical Beach which is better draw, doesn't take bench space and takes less deck space. The only usable Munna is the McDonalds one which are really hard to get at this point; a couple days ago the only one I found was used for 25 on amazon so at that point you might as well just buy a Tropical Beach.
If you're playing Trainer-lock, Musharna could be viable. If not, it's just awful Catcher bait and no one under any circumstances should ever play it.