Contest March 2020 CaC: Generation 8 (All Results Up!)

[FourteenAlmonds]

He is done and I will not touch it further; the readability I will give up on and the "tooth" (it does say teeth but it still looks off) can stay as it is, I'm just done XP

I tell you, competing for image in this thing is hard XD

Spoiler: References

Belly Drum:
- Froslass UNM
- Whimsicott CEC
- Arceus & Dialga & Palkia-GX CEC
- Herdier CEC

Last Resort:
- Hitmonlee TEU
- Whismur CES
- Mimikyu TEU
- Beedrill TEU
- Seismitoad CEC

I just hope it posts in here ok >.>

[SPOILER: Notes] @chico the placement of the CaC symbol isn't intended to be derivative of your past entries, but as I found out you've been doing this for a while.

Mad props to everyone in the Faking Community Discord, especially @CardPone and, a bit more indirectly, @aschefield101 since I used his blanks.

Wording is SM, balancing is Lackey's Expanded Modern, which if you don't want to judge against is comparable to Standard.

Art by me <3[/SPOILER]

So... you may have noticed, but I stuffed up the bb code at the end there...

What can I say, it's been a long day

If someone (read: someone who can) wants to fix that, they can go ahead and I would be grateful for that. Otherwise, its not worth editing myself and copping the -2 edit penalty haha

 

[chico]

It's fine lol

 

[Clam]

my entry
Dracovish V

Spoiler

Dracovish V 180 HP type-water, evolution-basic
Ability: Fossil Fuel.
Once during your turn you may put your active Unidentified Fossil in the lost zone if you do you may use the Fishy Bite attack for 2 less [W] energy. If you do, ignore the effects of the Fishy Bite attack.

Attack: Fishy Bite [W][W][W][W] 140+
This attack does 50 more damage.

weakness: [G] resistance: none

Pokemon V rule When your pokemon V is knocked out, your opponent takes 2 Prize cards SPOILER/]

wow I don't think I had alerts for this on?? but I do remember watching this thread...

oops forgot to add a retreat cost ;~;

 

[ShaQuL]

Here's my entry!

Spoiler: Entry

Galarian Runerigus - Psychic - 100HP
Stage 1 Pokémon- Evolves from Galarian Yamask

NO. 867 – Grudge Pokémon – HT: 5’3” – WT: 146.8 lbs.

[P][C] Void's Reach 30
Look at your opponent's face-down Prize cards. You may put any number of basic Pokémon cards you find there on the opponent's Bench, and put the cards from the top of your opponent’s deck face down in their place. Then shuffle your opponent’s face-down Prize cards. If your opponent’s Bench is full, you may discard the top 2 cards from their deck instead.

[P][C][C][C] Shadow Spear 120+
For each Pokémon your opponent has in play, deal 10 damage to 1 of your opponent's Benched Pokémon. (Don't apply Weakness and Resistance for Benched Pokémon.) If your opponent has exactly 6 Pokémon in play, this attack does 60 more damage.

Weakness: Darkness x2
Resistance: Fighting -30
Retreat: [C][C]

Never touch its shadowlike body, or you'll be shown the horrific memories behind the picture carved into it.

Spoiler: Notes

Short notes in this month’s entry, I was busy and left this bit until last minute… the wording on this one was quite hard to figure out, so I am expecting errors, but ah well. I wanted to use Runerigus because it seemed like the most overlooked Galarian evolution to me, but I can see I’m not the only one who chose it. The PokéDex entries and the fact that Runerigus weighs 66.6kg made me choose a hellish/afterlife theme for the Pokémon. At first I wanted to have Runerigus bring Pokémon back from the Lost Zone, but since that isn’t a realistic or viable mechanic, I went for Prize cards instead, as they can be seen as a “Void”; the cards in there are unknown and unreachable until a certain condition is met. Shadow Spear refers to the Shield entry specifically, as I imagined that the more Pokémon on the battlefield there are to witness the horrific memories of Runerigus, the more powerful the attack would be. I tried to balance the card by having relatively high costs, that are still reachable via special energy or acceleration such as Malamar or even Welder.

Spoiler: References

Void’s Reach:
Beast Ball (CES 125) for the “look” and “in its place” clause. Naganadel-GX (FOL 56) for the “from deck face down” clause. Also looked at Nihilego-GX (CRI 49).

Shadow Spear:
Morpeko-V (SSH 79) for the “Benched Pokemon” clause. Erika’s Hospitality (HIF 56) was the closest I could find for the “each Pokémon in play” clause. “Exactly” clause was appropriated from any Ultra Beast card referring to exact amounts of Prize cards (e.g., Poipole UNM 102).

HP, Weakness, Resistance & Retreat:
Used the updated SWSH for W&R. HP & Retreat based on the Runerigus revealed from Rebellion Crash.

 

[Nyan]

Why am I up at 6am, you may ask? Well, what other reason than CaC? Oh, Animal Crossing you say?

Well, you'd be half-right.

Spoiler: Juuuust the 3 of us

Spoiler: Click this to read me dying inside

This card took my heart, blood, soul, sweat, tears, and most importantly, many hours of sleep. I've spent way too much time thinking and overthinking this card (remember when Zapdos' attack required you to use basic Algebra?), putting it together, giving up halfway through, realizing i'm a dumbass, and then giving up one more time. Put it simply, this card took a lot out of me. I'm not even really sure why, but it just... did. And I don't think I'll quite do something like this again for... who knows how long, honestly. It could be years. And as much as I enjoyed making this card, I can't help but feel as if i'm battle scarred... I just hope everyone, even if you don't like the look, appreciates the effort. It's mind-blowing to think I started this card just about a month ago. And now we're here, a plethora of world events and a global pandemic later... so expect more image fakes from me soon, lol. If you like this visual style of card, these are my BROKEN ETERNITY blanks, named after the set they're originating from. They are currently incomplete, but if you are interested in them feel free to message me with any questions (my Discord is Nyan~#1505)
- original blanks by @aschefield101, heavily modified by me
- art was done by both Exileden and sushiartstudio (Please go give them all the love you can. This card would have NOT been possible without this art)
- big thank you's to everyone on the card faking Discord for helping me with effects & balance!

I know this card has some wording references, but I really wanna go to sleep. I'll find them later and make a separate post, if that's fine.~

And with that, I wish everyone a goodnight... er, good morning, I suppose.

Also, go look at @CardPone's card if you haven't already, because Dragapult is badass.

 

[Jabberwock]

Aaaaaaaaand that's a wrap on this round of the CaC! Stay tuned for @chico's and @FourteenAlmonds's judging at the end of the month!

 

[chico]

It's judging time!!

 

[FourteenAlmonds]

Time to get to work

 

[Pone]

Heh. I have a nice big wall of text there. Hope you like reading!

 

[chico]

Image-Based Results

Judge: @chico

This was my very first time judging. Not gonna lie, it was tougher that I expected. Having so many great and diverse cards together made it a challenge to configure the top 8. But after developing a judging system based on previous criteria and with @Jabberwock's guidance, I managed to do it. Kudos to him in his birthday!
Also let me know if I made any mistake lol

~~chico

Spoiler: steffenka’s Greedent-GX

TOTAL 59/100
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■

FINE 24/50 (48%)
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■

FUN 35/50 (70%)
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■

ART (5.5/10)

• The art is slightly engaging because the Pokémon is looking at the beholder. And, like other GX cards, the body gets out of the modules to add some 3D-ness. But other than that it's not that interesting. It also feels kinda empty even though the Pokémon takes up a lot of space. I wouldn't advise to make this kind of card because it requires more effort to be as visually impressive as other cards.
• The art is alright. It has color and shading which makes it look 3D-ish.
• The lineart is a bit sloppy. But at least you didn't use Sugimori art! I should say you should avoid tracing in general, though.

BLANK (1.6/5)

• The evolution text is a bit too high.
• The evolution icon is missing its stroke and contrast.

SFX (0.5/5)

• It has some grainy texture but it's barely noticeable. And the holofoil is downright invisible. What can't be seen does not exist.

TEXT (4.3/5)

• The fonts seem fine, though the white stroke looks a bit odd. For example, looking at the "g" in Stuff Cheeks is where the mistake is most noticeable. I can tell the stroke wasn't probably created in the Photoshop-standard way. However, the rest "g"s are fine. I don't know how that happened.
• The GX attack name and clause shouldn't be as slanted.
• The "p" is too close to the frame.
• Also, the words in the GX clause between brackets is more separate than normal.
• There seems to be a wrong apostrophe in Berry Blast (twice). The one on the GX attack is fine. I wonder why that happened. Did you use another font there?

(See Noivern-GX, Rayquaza-GX, or Palossand-GX.)

GAMEPLAY (7.0/10)

• It's on the lower end of GXs but the effects make for some of the lack of HP. Still, it can be a 1-2HKO, especially for a Fighting-type Pokémon.
• I think this card might be OP. Not for the damage output but for the fact that you can cripple your opponent if they don't fill up their Bench and evolve fast. Not to mention the block to special energy users.
• Th RC is fine though it's a bit powerful so probably I'd make it slower for balance reasons (3 or 4 RC). Note: in the latest official card it has 1 RC. But it's not half as powerful as this one. -0.5
• The card is easy to set up. With only two energies (one DCE) you can start dealing big numbers on turn 2. The first attack also helps if you don't carry DCEs with you. Though you might wanna have some energy searching cards to fill up your hand. You also can use it in any deck!
• I think this card can be quite useful from beginning to end. Not only it's bulky compared to non-GX Pokémon; but the fact that it can heal itself even when you have no energies left to attach, and that its GX attack protects it from a potentially devastating blow makes it quite tanky. Berry Blast can also keep opponent's on their toes no matter if they use basic energy or not.

EFFECTS (7.5/10)

• Even though attaching energy and healing is not new, there are no other Pokémon in the SM era that do it. However, the other two effects are quite unique in their combination I believe.
• It might be a bit too wordy of a card but since it doesn't obscure the important parts of the art I'm just gonna dock a half a point for wordiness.
• It seems like this card can be used on its own instead of a combo, which makes it all the easier to set up. There isn't much synergy between the attacks other than the energy acceleration. Perhaps it can be used with cards that move energy around or that count on your opponent not having energy or Benched Pokémon.
• The card is really fun! It's especially fitting for control decks. I'm gonna dock a point here for Berry Blast's effect.

FLAVOR (3.0/5)

• Squirrel-themed!

Spoiler: bbninjas’s Flapple-GX

TOTAL 69/100
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■

FINE 34/50 (68%)
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■

FUN 35/50 (70%)
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■

ART (7.5/10)

• Great, dynamic, 3D art! There seems to be a wind breeze indicating that the apple has been opened.
• It's a good 3D render! Positioning takes time.

BLANK (2.0/5)

• Everything looks alright for a standard blank.

SFX (3.0/5)

• It has an holofoil that adds texture and color vibrance to the card.
• It also has some extra elements like wind and leaves.

TEXT (4.4/5)

• The fonts seem fine, though the white stroke looks noticeably odd. It's too sharp, thin and transparent.
• Also, the color of the ability name should be a darker shade of red, I believe.

GAMEPLAY (6.0/10)

• It's on the lower end of GXs regarding HP. It can be a 1-2HKO, especially for a Fire-type Pokémon.
• It's a bit underpowered for a GX, and it also deals damage to your own Pokémon.
• Everything is in order regarding W/R/RC. To reinforce its HP I'd suggest adding a resistance to Water, for example.
• The advantage of this card is that it can draw energy on your field to itself. It's attack costs are average so it can get in action quickly. Paired with energy attaching effects, I can see potential as an energy charger for more powerful Pokémon.
• Flapple-GX usefulness decreases mid-game onwards. You need to get it up quickly to use its GX attack and start milling your opponent as soon as possible for the low amount of 1 card per turn. But once your main Pokémon—clearly not this card—is done for, loses its worth unless you have some way to retrieve that energy to the field from the discard pile. In other words, it's way too dependant on other cards to be useful.

EFFECTS (6.5/10)

• Interesting effects! It's not common to see effects like these that also hurt you as well. It is reminiscent of Tapu Koko-GX and Lunala-GX.
• It might be a bit too wordy of a card but since it doesn't obscure the important parts of the art I'm just gonna dock a point for wordiness. Perhaps you could've moved Flapple a bit higher so there's so space between the lowest part of its body and the text.
• I don’t see synergy between the effects but might be a versatile card. It can work with cards well with cards that put energy on your field or that take advantage of being damage or your discard pile.
• It could be fun, though it's not as apparent for the adverse effects.

FLAVOR (5.0/5)

• Fruit-themed!

Spoiler: KnightofDust’s Runerigus

TOTAL 70/100
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■

FINE 32/50 (64%)
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■

FUN 38/50 (76%)
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■

ART (7.5/10)

• The art style reminds me of older eras.
• Great, dynamic art! It's about to pop out of the card!
• It has an abstract background that it's complemented by the card texture.

BLANK (2.4/5)

• The card seems to be from the Neo era with UI elements from the SM era.
• The evolution icon has a dark border and contrast. However, the evolution text is a bit too high.
• The blank does improve on UI efficiency but it feels a bit empty.

SFX (1.0/5)

• It uses a blank diamond tile texture.

TEXT (5.0/5)

• Flawless.

GAMEPLAY (8.5/10)

• The HP is fine for the era.
• The damage output is fine for the era.
• It's missing Fighting-type resistance. Note: Ghost-types in the Neo era didn't have weakness to Dark-types.
• It's easy to set up because it only needs 2 energies minimum (with DCE).
• This card can prove very resistant throughout the game combined with healing effects.

EFFECTS (6.5/10)

• It's a quite rare effect. I can't recall seeing a card like this before.
• It's a bit wordy of a card.
• The ability and the attack thrive off of each other. I don't see it synergizing with other cards right off the bat. Perhaps, with cards that take advantage of a small hand? But overall it comes across as a lone wolf.
• Having a wall that can chip away life of any Pokémon is fun!
• Even though the effects are not outside the realm of possibility, they feel like the effects of another popular TCG. Usually when face down cards are mentioned, Prize cards are involved.

FLAVOR (4.0/5)

• Vanilla flavor.
• Ghost-themed!

Spoiler: Farisk7’s Toxtricity

TOTAL 59/100
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■

FINE 32/50 (64%)
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■

FUN 27/50 (54%)
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■

ART (8.0/10)

• I can feel how Toxtricity is coming towards me!
• Detailed background

BLANK (2.0/5)

• Just your standard blank!

SFX (2.0/5)

• It has a holosheet that gives a texture similar to the light beams in the art.

TEXT (3.8/5)

• The ability names seems to be a bit brighter than normal and for some reason it's hurting my eyes.
• The text looks kinda taller than normal.
• The 1 in 120 is a bit too separated from the other numbers.
• There should be commas blocking out "except for [D] Energy"
• The discard pile hasn't been searched since HGSS, so the attack should just say "put a Trainer card from your discard pile into your hand"

GAMEPLAY (5.5/10)

• The HP is higher than average for the stage in the SWSH era. The Pokémon doesn't have as much HP stats in the games either.
• The damage output is too great for a Stage 1 in SWSH, but that gets balanced by its 3 Darkness energy cost. That gives a damage efficiency of 40 per energy, which is okay.
• It's hard to set up on turn 2 without some energy acceleration.
• Its high HP can grant you some time but if you can't manage to charge it on time, it's gonna get KO'd before it can be of any use.

EFFECTS (4.0/10)

• The effects are nothing out of the ordinary! They remind me of Hydreigon and Shiftry.
• The "You can't apply...at a time" clarification wasn't necessary. You could have used that extra space to add one more attack.
• I don't see synergy between the effects. Perhaps cards that benefit from having a big hand or Tools attached can be used in tandem with Toxtricity.
• It's not as interesting to play, especially because you have to add extra Lightning energies to activate the attack effect.

FLAVOR (4.0/5)

• Vanilla flavor.
• Guitar-themed!

Spoiler: CardPone’s Dragapult

TOTAL 69/100
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■

FINE 40/50 (80%)
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■

FUN 29/50 (58%)
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■

ART (7.5/10)

• The art is just the equivalent of a T-pose. It's not very interesting to look at besides the fact that the Pokémon is looking towards the beholder.
• It has scenery as the background.

BLANK (4.1/5)

• The card seems to be from the Classic era with UI elements from the SM era.
• The evolution icon is missing its stroke and contrast.
• The evolution text is a bit too high.
• The blank does improve on UI efficiency but it feels a bit empty. Perhaps you should've placed the CaC symbol at the mid-right of the card like it was done in the Neo era. That said, I really enjoy the background extending over the card frame. It reminds me of Gyarados-GX.

SFX (4.0/5)

• Love the custom triangular texture on the card (that resemble Dragapult's launchers) and the circular one in the type orb.
• The applied holosheet looks like sunlight and since the scene takes place at dawn/dusk it's quite fitting.

TEXT (4.7/5)

• The ability name and the text line below are way too close to each other. You can see this with the "p"s. It makes the card look less professional.

GAMEPLAY (5.5/10)

• The HP is the sweet spot for the rotation and stage you chose.
• As regards power, this card is potentially way too powerful for the rotation it was intended for. The maximum damage efficiency can be 80 per energy, provided Dragapult has 4 Dreepy attached and you're packing DCEs or Dragon Energy. That's more than double of the average for stage 2s. Even with no special energies, it's still too high. I'd suggest making it a 4 energy attack. However, the fact that it needs some turns before maximum damage output is reached balances the card a bit.
• It's a stage 2 Pokémon so that makes it inherently harder to set up. Not to mention that in order to unleash its full power you need to discard all the very first stage that lets you play it in the first place. A way to skip stages and flip up your prizes and discard your cards is necessary to counter its clunkiness.
• The silverlining is that the attack cost is relatively cheap.
• The power of this card increases as the game goes on, shining midgame.

EFFECTS (7.0/10)

• Interesting and novel effects!
• The effects have synergy with each other. The ability lets it use its only attack to its full potential. In order to use this card effectively you have to combine it with other cards.
• The effects are really cool but the fact that's hard to pull off the perfect game for Dragapult to shine makes it less fun to play with.
• The effects are a tad crazy for PCL standards.

FLAVOR (2.0/5)

• Vanilla flavor.
• Aircraft-themed!

Spoiler: AlphaLad’s Galarian Sirfetch’d

TOTAL 67/100
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■

FINE 28/50 (56%)
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■

FUN 39/50 (78%)
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■

ART (7.5/10)

• Right off the bat, the art is striking and eye-catching. Mostly due to the dynamic posing and Sirfetch’d eye, which is directed at the beholder. The quality is pretty good as well!

BLANK (2.0/5)

• Just your standard blank!

SFX (0.0/5)

• No added sfx. The wind and petals are part of the art itself.

TEXT (4.6/5)

• It’s "illus." with a dot, not a colon.
• It should say "from your hand onto your Bench during your turn"

GAMEPLAY (7.0/10)

• The HP is slightly above average.
• Regarding power, its maximum damage efficiency is 100 per energy, provided your Bench is full and damaged, and you're packing DCEs. That's double the average for V cards. However, since you need damage on your Bench to increase the damage output, I think that balances out. Though I'd add one more energy to the cost just to make sure it's not too OP.
• Being a Basic Pokémon and having a DCE in its attack cost makes it very easy to set up. Its ability also helps to power it up.
• The power of this card increases as the game goes on, shining midgame.

EFFECTS (8.5/10)

• That ability is original! You don't usually see Pokémon with an effect like that, mostly Supporters. The attack's effect is as old as the TCG.
• The effects are synergetic! It probably needs cards that can deal damage to your own Pokémon, like Rainbow Energy.
• It’s absolutely fun! Having all your team out as soon as possible and using teamwork to KO your opponent never gets old!

FLAVOR (4.0/5)

• Battle-themed!

Spoiler: FourteenAlmonds’s Greedent

TOTAL 59/100
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■

FINE 32/50 (64%)
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■

FUN 27/50 (54%)
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■

ART (10.0/10)

• The big eyes and the fact this medium is not usually use to illustrate cards makes it eye-catching.
• It has scenery as background.

BLANK (1.6/5)

• The evolution text is a bit too high.
• The evolution icon is missing its stroke and contrast.

SFX (1.0/5)

• Lava holosheet/texture!
• The CaC symbol contrasts too much with the card and makes it harder to read the effects.

TEXT (3.7/5)

• The font of the flavor text is not correct.
• The effects' text is not as justified as it should be.
• The damage should be placed more to the right.
• The HP text should be a bit higher.
• The attack names are too close to the energy cost.
• You've used the wrong apostrophe twice.

GAMEPLAY (6.0/10)

• The HP is the same as the latest official card.
• Both attacks balance each other out. Provided your Bench is full and you put 50 damage counters on each Pokémon, that'd result in a boost of 300. However, the reduction of the second attack (60x5 = 300) would make the boost null and void (and you'd have damaged all your team in the process). On another scenario, with no Benched Pokémon and damaging itself, it could deal between 190 to 240 damage. That gives a damage efficiency of 240 per energy (120 without DCE). Moreover, the effect doesn't say that it can only be used once so if you have a way to heal it this card can be potentially broken. To avoid this pitfall you could add 1 or 2 energies to the attack cost or reduce the damage output somehow.
• The RC is fine though it's a bit powerful so probably I'd make it slower for balance reasons (3 or 4 RC). Note: in the latest official card it has 1 RC. But it's not half as powerful as this one.
• It's quite easy to set up due to its stage and low energy cost.
• Because it can damage itself it may probably not last long.

EFFECTS (6.5/10)

• Definitely original!
• It's a bit wordy of a card.
• There's definitely synergy between the effects. This card could benefit from healing cards.
• Using a card that powerful that can become increasingly powerful? Sign me up! Though, I think the effects are too good for a non-GX card like this one.
• It's slightly out of character for PCL to have that many conditions to perform an attack.

FLAVOR (1.0/5)

• Vanilla flavor.
• The effect names aren't that original or related to the Pokémon.
• The card is a bit blurry.

Spoiler: Nyan’s Galarian Moltres & Galarian Articuno & Galarian Zapdos

TOTAL 79/100
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■

FINE 43/50 (86%)
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■

FUN 36/50 (72%)
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■

I’d like to start by saying I absolutely loved these cards and I can tell you put a lot of effort into them. Because of that, I’m going to judge them to the very last detail, which was quite enjoyable in this case because there is so much to them. I think you have a great talent and you can improve even more. As you say, this is a peak in your card-creating journey but you haven’t hit your pinnacle just yet.

ART (7.5/10)

• Without further ado, I’m going to start with the visual aspect. Specifically, the Pokémon art. The art you chose is spectacular and dynamic. It’s quite appealing partly because of the way the birds are arranged and the disposition of their wings, which form a mountain range shape. The grainy texture helps with the cohesion as it gives off the same ancient vibe as the blank itself without having to resort to a pictographic approach for the art (like other official ancient cards).

BLANK (5.0/5)

• Now, onto the blank, since you made it yourself. I sincerely think it’s the best blank I’ve ever seen. Congratulations! However, I do have some gripes with it.
• I don’t understand why your name isn’t in the cards even though you modded asche’s template heavily.
• In my opinion, there was no need to repeat the HP. Having the HP in all the cards can be confusing (Are they three independent Active Pokémon or not?) I believe that at least the HP shouldn’t be repeated, but the name and type are okay.
• I also like the triangle the elemental orbs form. However, I’d have preferred if they were more separate from each other. Maybe connected with a lightning bolt or another effect.
• As for the order of the Pokémon names, apparently there hasn’t been consistent in the TCG (Articuno sometimes is the last one but other times is the first one; Moltres always coming before Zapdos for some reason). So in this case I guess you were original in this, too, by leaving Articuno second. My personal preference is for Articuno to be last because it has the longest name of the three. But the order you chose is valid. What I don’t understand is why the ability, which always appears before any other attack, is on the second card (Articuno) and not on the first one (Moltres). Maybe you could’ve placed Articuno first (following the Dex order) or given Moltres the ability instead.
• It could’ve been interesting to see the cards sharing “modules”. For example, one third could have the weakness, other the resistance, and the last one, the retreat cost. Or have the rule explanation split into three instead of repeating it three times. This would’ve increased the space efficiency and consistency as a unique card split into thirds. I think that although you didn’t choose the best approach to the design of the blank, it doesn’t look bad at all.
• I’ve noticed that there’s too much empty space. The original LEGEND cards had one half full of art and the other half was dedicated to attacks. Also, the texture at the top seems to have been painted over using a mask instead of each color being its own set of strokes. It doesn’t look bad but it’s something to take into account.
• Moreover, the size and disposition of elements of the “UI” change from card to card (as it happens with the official LEGEND cards). On the one hand, it makes each card unique but on the other hand, it makes them inconsistent as a whole.
• I’d have loved if you played more with the magic number 3. Instead of 250 HP, you could’ve put 300 like the original TAG TEAM, or 330 if you wanted to make the Galarian (non-vanilla) forms seem more powerful. Same goes for weakness. You could’ve have chosen x3 since the HP was going to be higher. You could've make it resistant to its own types. Or giving out 3 prizes instead of 2. The damage outputs aren’t multiple of 3 either, with the exception of Infernal Pact for 60.
• All that said, these cards managed to be completely original in their structure compared to official LEGEND cards without distancing themselves too much to the point of being unrecognizable. The overall design of the card is chaotic but not in a bad way. It fills them with life in a sense.

SFX (5.0/5)

• Some other positive aspects of the cards I can mention are the texture and how colorful they look.
• There seem to be lightning bolts as well.

TEXT (4.0/5)

• There aren’t any mistakes with the font choices as they are the official ones. Neither with grammar or syntax.
• The font size is slightly bigger than the original LEGEND cards, which is appreciated especially by short-sighted folks. Though, the size of the LEGEND play rule is unnecessarily big in some instances.
• I think the text could’ve been broken apart even more to follow the shapes of the Pokémon better. Also, having important text like rules be read sideways is not a very adequate choice from a graphic design standpoint.

GAMEPLAY (4.0/10)

• As for balance, since you didn't clarify which era these cards are supposed to be for, I'll take it it's a HGSS-era card like the other LEGENDs. I also took into account the damage output, which is similar to LEGEND cards.
• The HP is way higher than any LEGEND that was ever printed. Makes sense because these are 3 Pokémon instead of 2. But still, I think the HP is just broken.
• In terms of power, the maximum damage output is slightly lower than average for LEGEND cards. However, the potential to eliminate your opponent's Benched Pokémon sacrificing your own makes it a force to be reckoned with. Finally, the milling potential and the possibility to bring your fallen Pokémon back to life adds to an already powerful set of cards.
• I like the idea of having three weaknesses not only because it's a thematic choice (the trio) but because it helps balance the broken-high HP.
• Thanks to Infinite Eyes you can get all the thirds at once. The problem is that you can only have 1 Articuno third and you have to search for it. Therefore, a part of the deck has to be allotted to perform that task. Also, the requirement of DCE in the attack costs helps you set it up more quickly, compensating a bit for the difficulty of playing the card.
• Because it's a LEGEND Pokémon, it's probably gonna be most useful from midgame onwards. Its high HP for the era makes it a vehemoth to fight against. Luckily, it has three weaknesses.

EFFECTS (9.0/10)

• The effects are relatively creative but they seem kinda random (why until it has 80 HP? What if the Pokémon has less HP than that originally?)
• Other than that, there isn’t much synergy between them apart from the searching ability. Perhaps instead of reviving only the Pokémon discarded, you could've make it revive any Pokémon to make Infernal Pact synergize with Tempest Tribute. Probably cards that take advantage of a big discard pile can benefit from this trio.

FLAVOR (5.0/5)

• There’s no flavor text as with all LEGEND cards. Though I’d have added it instead of the repeated LEGEND rule explanation since this is a custom blank.
• I do like the effects though, especially the relation with the name of the attacks and the Pokémon.

*drum roll*

Spoiler: Top 3 & Trophies

• 3rd Place: bbninjas’s Flapple-GX and CardPone’s Dragapult, with 69/100 points.

• 2nd Place: KnightofDust’s Runerigus, with 70/100 points. Additionally, this card has been awarded the following trophies: Best Written, Best Stats.

• 1st Place: Nyan’s Galarian Moltres & Galarian Articuno & Galarian Zapdos, with 79/100 points. Additionally, this card has been awarded the following trophies: Finest Card, Best Blank, Best SFXs, Best Effects.

Honorable Mentions:

• AlphaLad's Galarian Sirfetch'd V has been awarded the Most Fun Card trophy.
• FourteenAlmonds's Greedent has been awarded the Best Art trophy.

 

[Vom]

Somehow I missed this one?? and almost signed up?? I actually thought this was May CaC...though in my defense, the title still says sign ups open

That being said, that's literally the most beautiful card I've ever seen, definitely well deserved Nyan, congratulations!

I also couldn't help but notice that... Fourteen freakin' Almonds was the judge for text based this month? Damn, this was the one month not to miss. Congratulations on being accepted!

 

[bbninjas]

Thanks fo judging Chico! Appreciate your insights, there's a few things there that hasn't ever crossed my mind before! The percentage bar is pretty cool too.

This might be more a Jabber question, are we moving on from the usual judging breakdown specified in the OP, or are we just trying out something different this month? Got some ideas but it's probably not worth raising them if this is just a temporary thing!

 

[chico]

@bbninjas At least for image-based I'll be using that layout for judging. But if you have ideas or concerns let me know!

 

[Jabberwock]

though in my defense, the title still says sign ups open

No it doesn't :>

I also couldn't help but notice that... Fourteen freakin' Almonds was the judge for text based this month? Damn, this was the one month not to miss. Congratulations on being accepted!

Almonds will be back, dontchu worry.

This might be more a Jabber question, are we moving on from the usual judging breakdown specified in the OP, or are we just trying out something different this month?

Yep, this is chico's judging system. Obviously it's quite a bit different from how CaC has been run in the past, but new judge, new judging! I'm going to be taking a backseat for the near future as I move toward stepping away from CaC entirely, so chico will be taking over the helm of image-based, and this system, assuming it works out well, is what you can expect for future rounds too.

We're still sorting out a few kinks in the system, so bear with us for the time being. We're working on revamping the OP, so that'll be updated soon for May. If you have any questions/comments/suggestions, of course, as always, feel free to shoot them our way. ^.^

 

[Vom]

No it doesn't :>

...because I fixed it...

 

[Pone]

I appreciate all the pointers, but I need to say that I'm really not on board with the judging layout. For one, when we're told in the opening post exactly how points are going to be broken down and then the actual judging is done totally differently, it's a little bothersome. Things are being brought in from totally out of the blue and there's no way anyone could have accounted for it.

Docking people for using standard blanks is entirely frustrating because the point of using standard blanks is to go for authenticity, which is now being punished for some reason? Anyone who used a non-custom blank for their cards got 2 or fewer points for it, which apart from making no sense feels like it's going against the whole point of the contest. Not everyone has the tools to completely construct a blank from the ground up and neither should anyone be forced to do so for that score.

"Flavor" is incredibly vague and could mean anything, which again is frustrating for participants and doesn't feel like it has a point to it other than to give arbitrary point deductions. bbninjas has a perfect score in Flavor for being "Fruit-themed", but Steff only has 3/5 points in Flavor for being "Squirrel-themed", with no other comments made on how these scores were reached or how they can be improved upon next month. Only Almonds and Nyan had anything of value written under that category, and those comments would be easily categorized under the existing CaC point categories.

Grading on a total of 50 points, but having the total based on 100 points is also pretty inconsistent in my opinion. Pick one and stick to it.

Docking points for not having "dark border and contrast" shouldn't be a thing on custom blanks since those effects didn't even start until Black & White. The prerogative to choose not to include them should be on the maker of the custom blank.

There are a couple of categories where you give the contestant nothing but praise, but they don't have a perfect score. (SFX on Dragapult, for example. Or, more egregiously, SFX on Toxtricity.). If there's nothing you noted about how it could be improved, then why is it scored as if it need improvement? This is a problem almost universally for this month's scoring. The point breakdown used on several previous CaCs made it easy to identify where the biggest problems were for them to be fixed next time around. For some of these there's no indication of how to get a better score in X category in the next contest.

Overall it also feels kind of a bit harder to read it all? Maybe that one is just me, but previous months' ways of explaining things just seemed to flow better.

This isn't me being mad that this is my lowest CaC score yet (you seem to be grading harder in general if the average score is any indication, and that's just a matter of being a stricter judge), it's more of a frustration that an entirely different scoring system is being used than the tried-and-true-for-9-years one that we we were told we were going to get. And the arbitrary point reductions which don't seem to have any rhyme or reason. You have potential to be a really good judge, but there are a few things I think need to be worked on before this new layout is going to work out. I can't see myself doing more CaCs where the judging can have such vague explanations and arbitrary point reductions.

 

[bbninjas]

Ta Jabber, Chico! You guys have and continue to pour so much effort into keeping the competition running - and as a previous judge, I know how much work goes into this behind-the-scenes. It's really appreciated by me and all of us for sure!

I do have a number of concerns and have tried to lay them out as clearly as possible. I'm not wanting to steamroll anyone, but since introducing a new judging rubric will greatly impact the tone and the direction of the competition, I think it'd be worth having an open discussion about this. (edit: I see CP just posted something, so I hope I'm not repeating too much)

Questions:
I'm mostly wondering why the change has been made? I'm pretty partial to the old system as I think it works very well. I'm a "if it's not broken, don't fix it" guy - was there some issue with the old system?

Comments:
The new judging rubric seems to be quite the departure from the previous rubric. I've broken down the new rubric using the old categories for comparison. The old rubric seemed to emphasise creative ideas and accuracy. I believe the new rubric will emphasise playable ideas and artistic capacity. Do we want to be moving in this direction?

Spoiler: Text Breakdown

Creativity (Effects/Flavour): 30% --> ~20%
Wording (Effects): 30% --> ~10%
Fonts / Placements (Text): 20% --> 10%
Believability / Playability (Gameplay): 10% --> 20%
Aesthetics (Art / Blank / SFX): 10% --> 40%

Concerns: (my take only)
Regarding the fairness of the rubric:

• The rubric favours those who have lots of time to do fancy art and holosheeting, specifically for EXs / GXs, and disadvantages those who don't have time to do that.
• It disadvantages those who prefer to make cards without a special mechanics, else you get a low SFX score, and those who use official blanks, else you get a low Blanks score. Custom blanks are basically required for a good score here. (Is that intentional?)
• A strong emphasis on art will usually make judging more subjective, with the risk of making the competition hit-and-miss for competitors, which might be unfair. If your art style or effect creativity does not resonate with the judge, then you get low points. This is why the Aesthetics category was weighted 10% in the original rubric, and why judges were given a guide for judging Creativity to make that category less subjective.

Other:

• Wording seems to have very little prescence on the new rubric. Since Effects encompasses Believability, Wording, and Creativity all in one, it seems like you can have a creative card, and even if it's unbelievable or worded poorly, you can still get an above-average mark. (Is that intentional?)
• The rubric favours cards that are not believable. Some cards lost points for having the correct or usual HP and Weakness / Resistance/ Retreat for that Pokemon in that era. Other cards lost points of having a low retreat cost on a powerful card, even when doing so would make the card unbelievable.
• I think the new system is discouraging for text-fakers who might want to try out an image-based card. This is two-fold: the text-based rubric and the image-based rubric are very different, making a transition difficult; and new image fakers won't have technical prowess / artistic capacity, and will likely do poorly in "Fun" and in the portion overall.

Overall, I'm not really on board with the new judging rubric and I feel like it would need a bit of reworking so that it is fairer for all contestants and places more equal emphasis on the non-aesthetic aspects of card creation.

 

[Jabberwock]

[copy-pasted from Discord]

Cheers for the feedback y'all -- the short answer I can give right now is that chico wants to try out a new system and he's within his rights to do that as a judge. The way CaCs go from entries -> judging -> entries makes it harder to adapt to a new system, and there's always going to be a degree of whiplash. The hope is that over the course of this month's contest, we can have discussions about how it's all going to work, including areas of improvement or just clarification.

I want to apologize for the disorganization around the OP saying one thing and the actual judging being another. That's on me. Hopefully the updated OP for May can shed a bit of light on the workings of this system.

I'll let chico respond to the finer points of the feedback when he gets online. Sudden changes like this are difficult to adapt to, for sure, but I'd encourage y'all to keep an open mind -- the old system wasn't entirely without its flaws, and if we work together to iron out the kinks, this one might surprise you.

 

[chico]

when we're told in the opening post exactly how points are going to be broken down and then the actual judging is done totally differently

Well, I like to surprise people
I was actually told I could use my own system since I was judging the entries.

Docking people for using standard blanks (...) Not everyone has the tools to completely construct a blank from the ground up and neither should anyone be forced to do so for that score.

I didn't dock points for using a standard blank. That's like the base, the "0". It can go up or down. You may make an original blank that is confusing and doesn't improve on standard blanks, for example, and you might get even less points than a standard blank. You may even use a low-quality standard blank, too, and it's not gonna grant you the 2 points. It doesn't have to do with the fact that it's standard or not but the quality of the blank. However, I do award points for all the effort that goes into making a new blank. Otherwise, if all the blanks were the same, Nyan's blank would be as valuable as a poorly taken picture of a computer screen displaying a standard blank. It's not a matter of having the tools either. It's a matter of how well you use them.

"Flavor" is incredibly vague (...) no other comments made on how these scores were reached or how they can be improved upon next month.

I agree with you on that one. Flavor is a miscellaneous category under "Fun". It mostly deals with things that are left over from the rest of the analysis such as having the correct PokéDex info, having creative ability/attack names, flavor text (that's what "vanilla flavor" means btw), etc. It does have a subjective component of only 2/5 points and it's based on how the card "tasted" to me as a whole. It's the "je ne sais quoi", as French say it.

Grading on a total of 50 points, but having the total based on 100 points is also pretty inconsistent in my opinion. Pick one and stick to it.

Whoops! I can see how it can be confusing. To reach 100 points I just multiplied the base 50 by 2 to decide most of the ties.

Docking points for not having "dark border and contrast" shouldn't be a thing on custom blanks since those effects didn't even start until Black & White. The prerogative to choose not to include them should be on the maker of the custom blank.

I partially agree. But since you were using elements of SM blanks for the stage, I think you should keep SM conventions for that particular part.

There are a couple of categories where you give the contestant nothing but praise, but they don't have a perfect score. (...) If there's nothing you noted about how it could be improved, then why is it scored as if it need improvement? (...) For some of these there's no indication of how to get a better score in X category in the next contest.

I could be more specific with my feedback, for sure! The reason I wasn't is because I didn't want to sound robotic lol In reality, receiving praise but not having a perfect score means that you didn't go the extra mile to make the card look fantastic as SFX goes. In your case, your card didn't get full points because you didn't add EX-like effects, for example. That'd be the perfect score for the kind of card you made.

Overall it also feels kind of a bit harder to read it all? Maybe that one is just me, but previous months' ways of explaining things just seemed to flow better.

Are you sure you're not just short-sighted? I can't help you with that lol
But I can certainly make the explanations flow better. This is a new system after all and I'm still ironing things out.

This isn't me being mad that this is my lowest CaC score yet (you seem to be grading harder in general if the average score is any indication, and that's just a matter of being a stricter judge) (...) You have potential to be a really good judge, but there are a few things I think need to be worked on before this new layout is going to work out.

What do you mean lowest score? I'm pretty sure you've never scored 69! XD
I am a strict judge, yes. But I'm also fair as I don't cater to anyone in particular.
If there's anything to be improved I'll improve it. But keep in mind not every choice is worth the same. And that's an element that was not as strong in the previous system.

 

[Vom]

I'm not an image faker so I don't feel I can contribute much, but I do think that what makes or breaks a fake card is how realistic it is (which includes all the technical aspects of believability and wording, plus the image-exclusive fonts, placements, etc) rather that the aesthetics. That's not to say aesthetics should play no role - I mean, image fake - but I don't think the weighing they have right now is the way to go.