Discussion N Reprint: its Effect on the Game
- Thread starter Gible06
- Start date
I know about TRA. But you have to remember that there was a 5 year difference since it was 'reprinted' with a different name. N has only been out of format since Worlds, which was only 8 months ago. With this reprint we will have ANOTHER year with N at Worlds (Starting with 2012), making it at least until 2017 where N was in format for some duration. That is actually insane. Outside of energy, this should not be the case. I do know that there are about 400-600 new cards made every year, and some are inevitable to be reprinted, but having a reprint of a card so recently rotated makes no sense. While this might be good for the format, it does not make any sense with the TV series/Anime. This is XY, not BW anymore. There are many other trainers such as Viola, Grant, Ramos, Valerie, Wulfric, Diantha, Elite 4, etc. There really makes no sense why they should be making BW trainers that aren't relevant to the series anymore.
Elbow, do you feel they starting to distance the card game from the series? Or is it a possible lack of ideas?
I do not think they are distancing themselves. It is reflective to a degree, but not directly correlating. The problem I am having with it is that it doesn't make any sense outside of lack of ideas. I will agree that draw right now is very bad and needed a similar card, but an exact reprint? Why? I guarantee you PokeBeach forum members could create hundreds of diverse supporter cards than just reprinting cards that were just rotated out (like Level Ball, Skyla, Garb, and Mr. Mime).
I do give some leeway to cards rotated out a few sets ago. Such as Vileplume, Judge, Fisherman, etc. These cards are interesting to have in a different format. Thats why when TRA was reprinted as N it made the meta really cool with an old concept in a new environment. Reprinting it now not only barely changes the meta, but it brings back the terror of the 'N to 1' game, which if you have ever played it (I assume you have) is the absolute worst.
Yes, I have. I don't like the idea either, especially under item lock distress. It's an auto game loss. I honestly felt like draw support was really good. I mean before Shaymin, Unown, and Hoopa I remember being very stressed in the sense of getting a draw supporter, but now I feel like I draw more cards than I ever did in the past with fewer supporters. But it might just be me. I just thought it spiced the meta up by using pokemon for draw support V the traditional Supporter.
People complain about shaymin EX, N leaves standard, complaining about shaymin EX is at an all time high, N comes back. What is the relevance to what I just posted? The only thing that has ever offered valuable draw power in standard has been N, true we could switch up the format for more and or different draw mechanics but in truth the only substitute for good draw power is good draw power.
Incorrect. If you're finding that N is more luck-based than it is skill-based, you need to learn how to deck thin appropriately.
I think the root cause of the problem that you and some other people are having is that you keep saying it's an N to one card. Really, the values you can be N'd from aren't one to six, they're two to seven (remember, you have your draw for turn). Literally every deck can survive this N to "1+1" because they all are based on having nothing but outs in the deck.
Of course, I'm not saying it isn't possible that someone can't recover from an N (usually due to bad luck, or as I mentioned earlier, bad thinning), but the odds of recovering are far higher realistically than you're perceiving them to be.
So you can, of course, think that N was not the correct answer, but by doing so, you would be incorrect.
Yes, because the TCG should never be its own entity and should follow the anime always.
Where's our Ash Supporter card again? It should be in rotation literally every season...
Last edited by a moderator:
I believe this is largely dependent on the deck. While in every deck you can thin to increase your chances of not dead-drawing off N it is much harder for some decks. Looking at results in Expanded (non-BREAKpoint) the top two decks are able to thin or manipulate their top deck extremely well (Flareon and Dark). The number three deck (Seis / Bats) tends to dead draw quite a bit more than the other too. It also lacks the thinning power and based-off my experiences can be crippled by N.
Last edited:
Theres a difference between following the anime/making sense. Not everything has to follow the anime, but storywise it should somewhat. For example, you meet Cheren and Juniper early in the game and in the TCG, while later on you meet Iris and Ghetsis. It makes a bit of sense but not exactly like the game. The reason why this doesn't make sense at all is because they are in different regions. This made PERFECT sense when they did the juniper/sycamore reprint as it now reflects XY and not BW. As all of BW is rotated, the VG only uses XY-on Pokemon/games, and the anime is obviously set in XY, then why are they reprinting non-XY cards? It shows nothing but un-originality.
I did say it also relies on your opponent's hand as well compared to your own, even if you are both drawing the same amount of cards. The problem is as Camo said is there are not many decks that can manipulate N like in previous years as to now which makes it even more devastating if you're not careful.
N is what makes fairy box once again more possible.
Shauna and birch always fell flat... you need to conserve dem max potions at the start and not screw your hand over for the rest of the game
Shauna and birch always fell flat... you need to conserve dem max potions at the start and not screw your hand over for the rest of the game
In expanded to many decks move to outplay setup decks, same thing in standard that or there is far to many decks, N does not make decks good the format does that. Your likely to fall flat of draw power from N same as if you were to play birch, Shauna or judge.
But you probably were lucky to get ahead in prizes in the first place. We all have to admit that. Also, N isn't always the answer to a comeback nor will you always be N'd down to 1. Many times when your opponent is down to 5 or 4 prizes, you may want to play Juniper/Sycamore for more cards and thin your deck.
In Expanded at least, I think too many people are putting too many techs. Even Pooka and JWittz said this at the last Regionals stream. Consistency is key. You should be prepared for being N'd. Brad got N'd down to 1 but cameback. Granted he was playing Dark so he thinned out his deck but let's be real. What deck doesn't play a turbo or semi-turbo engine nowadays?
Elbow, brilliant, that is the most sound reasoning for not having N. I think the knowledge of the game and arch type of Pokemon shows a consistent manner on how they have released card in the past. Basically, your pointing out that they are not being consistent to not only previous releases, but to the story Arch that has always followed the releases. That is called a plot gap. By that comment you could speculate that in someway or somehow that N will be revisiting current anime series. That is called a "You Tube Speculation: Vlog". Brilliant! Now if N doesn't coming come back, you can then speculate that Pokemon card game is no longer consistent with the story Arch, and that card game will become a silo of the series. Which then you can speculate a corporate power struggle within their headquarters between the card game and the anime series. Does the card game want to break from the series?
I can think of two reasons to reprint N instead of a functional reprint with a different character.
1) Accessibility. A lot of enfranchised players already have N due to the Expanded format. That may or may not be a concern for TPCI, but I'm certain players will appreciate being able to use their existing copies of N.
2) Expanded. It is very likely that having access to up to 8 copies of N is not something TPCI wants in Expanded, nor another Juniper/Sycamore style compromise, especially if the new supporter would have had no thematic link back to N.
1) Accessibility. A lot of enfranchised players already have N due to the Expanded format. That may or may not be a concern for TPCI, but I'm certain players will appreciate being able to use their existing copies of N.
2) Expanded. It is very likely that having access to up to 8 copies of N is not something TPCI wants in Expanded, nor another Juniper/Sycamore style compromise, especially if the new supporter would have had no thematic link back to N.
Not sure if anyone noted this, but anyway,
PCL may seem unoriginal by reprinting N, but last I checked, the Japanese TCG Standard format is BLW-on (probably the reason that worlds was in Expanded) so the real problem is not of originality, but the fact that the rest of the world rotates sets about 4 times faster than Japan.
PCL may seem unoriginal by reprinting N, but last I checked, the Japanese TCG Standard format is BLW-on (probably the reason that worlds was in Expanded) so the real problem is not of originality, but the fact that the rest of the world rotates sets about 4 times faster than Japan.
Edit: I sound really cranky in this post, because I was. Editing things is going to make it look like I am hiding it so... yeah, a little harsh with how I responded. Not an excuse, just an explanation: some of these are pet peeves, such as when I deal with more serious matters but experience similar struggles where someone makes a claim that two things are mutually exclusive when they are not. Of course, @asdjklghty may be encountering people who really are just whining about N without justification.
"Best" =\= "Perfect"
Which is of course just the tip of the rebuttal, and why even someone who is unfamiliar with the 2005 format or simply in disagreement over its being better than contemporary formats cannot speak with any real authority.
Now moving onto something I see in multiple posts, one needs to justify come-from-behind cards. Edit: Unless you are just pointing out they exist and how that is a potential function for N, in which case no you don't have to justify anything. This only applies to those that are making arguments such as "N needsto exist because we need win-from-behind cards." If your opponent is beating you through skill, why do you deserve to come from behind, especially through an overt mechanic that just hands it to you and not through skillful play? If your opponent is beating you due to luck, wouldn't it be better to fix the game so that there isn't that luck, or at least so little of it that there is no need for card effects to combat it?
N is not something I wanted to return because the bad outweighs the good. For those that want a come-from-behind card, it isn't even good at that; I learned back with Scramble Energy (though I should have known even earlier) that Prize counts are only a crude approximation of who is winning. Plenty of decks can go down a Prize when in fact their hand/field/deck/discard is far stronger than the opponent's, use come-from-behind effects, then rocket forward to a Prize lead with major field advantage to boot!
Or you need to accept that not everyone is a World's class player, as well as that bad luck happens. Hypothetically, maybe the game is much more balanced when you are among the most skilled players on the planet. Even if we extend that to the kind of people that reliably top cut at major events, that still is a fraction of the entire player base. I am not saying I believe this to be the case, but I've had people throw this argument at me before, so I allow the possibility. Mostly I think it is the obvious; the better you are, the less impact luck will have on you, but it doesn't actually mean there is less initial variance or that things are really balanced.
For sure though when you have run-of-the-mill types, this kind of thing matters. Good deck thinning is an important skill, but there are times when you won't be able to do it before getting slammed by N (or at least not to a degree where it will prevent a dead hand), and sometimes you just can't prevent a dead hand without throwing something too important to risk out, including increasing your risk of deck out.
"Best" =\= "Perfect"
Which is of course just the tip of the rebuttal, and why even someone who is unfamiliar with the 2005 format or simply in disagreement over its being better than contemporary formats cannot speak with any real authority.
Getting in depth the pace of the game at the time was certainly different. Tolerances for various aspects of the game were not as tight; whiffing on a Supporter, a KO, etc. were not as devastating as they are now. Many (most?) decks in 2005 would have had one of Delcatty (EX: RubySapphire 5/109), Magcargo (EX: Deoxys 20/107) or Pidgeot (EX: FireRed/LeafGreen 10/112), sometimes two of the three on their Bench. For those unaware, all three had Poké-Powers (predecessor of Abilities) to aid in setting up and keeping your deck running smoothly. Delcatty had "Energy Draw" to discard an Energy card from hand and then draw three cards, so any Energy card restarts your hand even if your hand had shrunk down to a single card. Magcargo has "Smooth Over", which allowed you to search your deck for a card to top deck; perhaps the least effective option (Rocket's Admin. would undo this) but it meant if you had any other draw effect you could once again restart your deck that turn, or ensure that you only had one wasted turn if your opponent didn't keep forcing you to shuffle. Pidgeot and its "Quick Search", which simply allowed you to add a card to your hand from your deck; even if you zeroed someone's hand out Pidgeot could restart it!
Draw power at this time was also lower; at first this makes Rocket's Admin. sound more vicious, but it mostly meant combos were more modestly sized, and all draw power more effective. Professor Oak's Research had the same yield as Shauna, and was still considered a solid card. TV Reporter was another good draw card, and it had you draw three cards, then discard one card from your newly enlarged hand. More dynamic and potentially larger draws were possible with Copycat (shuffle your hand away and then draw until your hand is equal to your opponent's hand) and Steven's Advice (draw a card for each of your opponent's Benched Pokémon, can't be played if your hand has 7+ cards in it). In fact the draw from Rocket's Admin. was more favorable under these circumstances; not really bad unless it messed up a carefully planned hand or left you with three or less cards.
Most decks didn't burn through as many Items (not that they were called that at the time) each turn, either. Rocket's Admin. was a potent play in certain decks, such as those using Electrode-ex. Though not used in most decks, I recall at least a few that would intentionally blow up two Electrode-ex on a player's first turn with Evolutions, which isn't quite clear because I don't remember the first turn rules of that year. If Items were allowed first turn, then it could be first turn because Rare Candy used to let you skip any and all waiting and go to the Stage 1 or the Stage 2 from the Basic. When all worked well you would attach a bunch of Energy to multiple attackers, including Scramble Energy which provided three units of Energy that counted as all Types so long as you had fewer Prizes than your opponent. As OHKOs weren't as common at this time, while you dropped yourself to two Prizes your opponent had high risk of never setting up or at least setting up so slowly that it would soon be neck-and-neck. There was also Pow! Hand Extension which only worked while you had fewer Prizes than your opponent but gave you a choice of moving an Energy from the opponent's Active to one of his or her Benched Pokémon, or acting as a Lysandre in Item form.
Fortunately, this was not all decks, as it likely would be in the present day with most of these options present.
Draw power at this time was also lower; at first this makes Rocket's Admin. sound more vicious, but it mostly meant combos were more modestly sized, and all draw power more effective. Professor Oak's Research had the same yield as Shauna, and was still considered a solid card. TV Reporter was another good draw card, and it had you draw three cards, then discard one card from your newly enlarged hand. More dynamic and potentially larger draws were possible with Copycat (shuffle your hand away and then draw until your hand is equal to your opponent's hand) and Steven's Advice (draw a card for each of your opponent's Benched Pokémon, can't be played if your hand has 7+ cards in it). In fact the draw from Rocket's Admin. was more favorable under these circumstances; not really bad unless it messed up a carefully planned hand or left you with three or less cards.
Most decks didn't burn through as many Items (not that they were called that at the time) each turn, either. Rocket's Admin. was a potent play in certain decks, such as those using Electrode-ex. Though not used in most decks, I recall at least a few that would intentionally blow up two Electrode-ex on a player's first turn with Evolutions, which isn't quite clear because I don't remember the first turn rules of that year. If Items were allowed first turn, then it could be first turn because Rare Candy used to let you skip any and all waiting and go to the Stage 1 or the Stage 2 from the Basic. When all worked well you would attach a bunch of Energy to multiple attackers, including Scramble Energy which provided three units of Energy that counted as all Types so long as you had fewer Prizes than your opponent. As OHKOs weren't as common at this time, while you dropped yourself to two Prizes your opponent had high risk of never setting up or at least setting up so slowly that it would soon be neck-and-neck. There was also Pow! Hand Extension which only worked while you had fewer Prizes than your opponent but gave you a choice of moving an Energy from the opponent's Active to one of his or her Benched Pokémon, or acting as a Lysandre in Item form.
Fortunately, this was not all decks, as it likely would be in the present day with most of these options present.
Now moving onto something I see in multiple posts, one needs to justify come-from-behind cards. Edit: Unless you are just pointing out they exist and how that is a potential function for N, in which case no you don't have to justify anything. This only applies to those that are making arguments such as "N needsto exist because we need win-from-behind cards." If your opponent is beating you through skill, why do you deserve to come from behind, especially through an overt mechanic that just hands it to you and not through skillful play? If your opponent is beating you due to luck, wouldn't it be better to fix the game so that there isn't that luck, or at least so little of it that there is no need for card effects to combat it?
N is not something I wanted to return because the bad outweighs the good. For those that want a come-from-behind card, it isn't even good at that; I learned back with Scramble Energy (though I should have known even earlier) that Prize counts are only a crude approximation of who is winning. Plenty of decks can go down a Prize when in fact their hand/field/deck/discard is far stronger than the opponent's, use come-from-behind effects, then rocket forward to a Prize lead with major field advantage to boot!
Or you need to accept that not everyone is a World's class player, as well as that bad luck happens. Hypothetically, maybe the game is much more balanced when you are among the most skilled players on the planet. Even if we extend that to the kind of people that reliably top cut at major events, that still is a fraction of the entire player base. I am not saying I believe this to be the case, but I've had people throw this argument at me before, so I allow the possibility. Mostly I think it is the obvious; the better you are, the less impact luck will have on you, but it doesn't actually mean there is less initial variance or that things are really balanced.
For sure though when you have run-of-the-mill types, this kind of thing matters. Good deck thinning is an important skill, but there are times when you won't be able to do it before getting slammed by N (or at least not to a degree where it will prevent a dead hand), and sometimes you just can't prevent a dead hand without throwing something too important to risk out, including increasing your risk of deck out.
Last edited: