Discussion Sightseer is a Garbage Card

[alyL]

I don't understand why people use it when we have GOD SOPHOCLES.

For backstory, I was using a deck with Lurantis GX and because of this, I obviously want energy in the discard. In standard we don't have Battle Compressor or Sycamore, so I'm basically stuck with Ultra Ball and Acro bike for item based discard. I started making it shortly after LOT was released, so I figured I'd give Sightseer a try as some supporter based discard... Big mistake. The draw power is so nonexistent and you often have to discard way too much to make it worthwhile. Compare this to Sophocles, AKA Sun and Moon's shorter and wider Clemont, and you'll get what I mean.

He only needs to discard 2 to draw 4. To reach this level of AMAZING DRAW POWER with Sightseer, you need to have a 3 card hand after playing down SS. Any bigger and you're either drawing less or discarding more. The only way to outdraw Sophocles is if you go down to an empty hand, but that's just by *1* card. Sophocles just has so much more draw potential and is way more consistent.

Only benefits Sightseer may have are

1. If you *want* to discard more than 2 cards from your hand, which is again, very situational and unlikely.
2. Have a hand smaller than 2 (after playing your SS/Sophocles). I can't say this is the most valid point either because people have no trouble discarding two with Ultra Ball for the sake of grabbing Lele and drawing more cards off of the supporter.

TL;DR Sightseer is a card you should never be using as long as Sophocles is in the format.

By the way, if someone can give me a realistic scenario where Sightseer > Sophocles, please tell me.

 

[JumpluffTCG]

I agree. Sightseer is a terrible card.

But I also don't think Sophocles is all that great either. In terms of card economy, it's a +1, since you discard 2 cards and lose Sophocles (so -3) in exchange for 4 cards (+4). It definitely doesn't feel as fulfilling as Cynthia or a solid Lillie from 2 to 6 cards, so I have a hard time calling Sophocles "amazing" in terms of draw power.

That being said, in a deck like Blacephalon, I find myself preferring Sophocles over Sightseer, so you're right about that. Sightseer just has really weak draw power and to add to point 2 you brought up, most decks play Lillie that they would rather play in that kind of scenario over Sightseer.

 

[Otaku]

By the way, if someone can give me a realistic scenario where Sightseer > Sophocles, please tell me.

Neither card is all that great, and since I had at least some hopes for either, it hurts me to admit this. If you have 0 or 1 card left in your deck, usually when you need draw power the most, Sophocles cannot be played. If you need to discard more than three cards with your Supporter, Sophocles cannot do it. If you need to discard only one or zero cards while still drawing some, Sophocles cannot do it at all while Sightseer has a chance of still working.

If you find these unrealistic, I do not know how I can persuade you otherwise. While neither of these is super common, they do happen. Not with enough regularity for most decks to need either of these Supporters, I might add. Alolan Exeggutor (FLI) has had a small bit of competitive success and runs Sightseer because it does experience the above situations.

 

[alyL]

I agree. Sightseer is a terrible card.

But I also don't think Sophocles is all that great either. In terms of card economy, it's a +1, since you discard 2 cards and lose Sophocles (so -3) in exchange for 4 cards (+4). It definitely doesn't feel as fulfilling as Cynthia or a solid Lillie from 2 to 6 cards, so I have a hard time calling Sophocles "amazing" in terms of draw power.

Of course, and I agree with this. Although the way I see it is in decks where you would use Sightseer, just use Sophocles instead.

As for calling it amazing, I was having a bit of fun with the post as well because it seems ridiculous to be talking about how Sightseer, a hyped up draw supporter, is significantly worse than Sophocles, a card we've had for a long time and has seen little to no play.

 

[Alex Leblanc]

I think both Sightseer and Sophocles are situational cards and can be useful depending on what deck you are using. I run Ultra Squids and I need things in the discard, but I play aggressively relying on item cards and being KOed to get energies in the discard. Neither of the cards are good but I wouldn't call them bad either, they both have their time and place.

 

[birdboy2000]

I'm not 100% sure playing Sightseer over Sophocles is correct, but I'm still on one. It lets you draw more aggressively if you really need to, but also playing your hand down to 0 isn't the hardest thing in the world - and if you're playing a draw supporter, having nothing but playable and dead cards in hand is far from out of the question. Running stall though, so I'm more concerned about pitching what isn't relevant in the matchup than about making sure I have energy in the discard, and don't have evolutions I'm worried about keeping; Sophocles might be better in a deck like Lurantis.

 

[The Almighty Bidoof]

I agree. Sightseer is a terrible card.

But I also don't think Sophocles is all that great either. In terms of card economy, it's a +1, since you discard 2 cards and lose Sophocles (so -3) in exchange for 4 cards (+4). It definitely doesn't feel as fulfilling as Cynthia or a solid Lillie from 2 to 6 cards, so I have a hard time calling Sophocles "amazing" in terms of draw power.

That being said, in a deck like Blacephalon, I find myself preferring Sophocles over Sightseer, so you're right about that. Sightseer just has really weak draw power and to add to point 2 you brought up, most decks play Lillie that they would rather play in that kind of scenario over Sightseer.

I don't think looking at how many cards you gain from a supporter matters. Such as Sophocles being a +1. Because all decks that run him WANT to discard cards. Say for example discarding Fire energy in Blacephalon. That being said, I prefer Sightseer. Being able to discard as many as you want will always be better to me :/

 

[AuraJackle]

Hey you know I remember when people were talking about how sightseer would be a 4 of in every deck those people are now very quiet in this subject. Sightseer is garbage sophocles and tate and lizza do on average draw more. sightseer is for the people who think they are going to have hands with 5 energys and want to discard them all for energy acceleration. Which is very unrealistic

 

[JumpluffTCG]

I don't think looking at how many cards you gain from a supporter matters. Such as Sophocles being a +1. Because all decks that run him WANT to discard cards. Say for example discarding Fire energy in Blacephalon. That being said, I prefer Sightseer. Being able to discard as many as you want will always be better to me :/

Maybe not as much as other cards games. But hand size still matters because it'll influence how flexible your hand is (like being able to play multiple Ultra Balls out of your hand). Either case, I can't be the only one who doesn't like that if I have 3 cards in hand along with a Sophocles, I end up with only 5 cards afterwards?

 

[snoopy369]

Sightseer has a specific advantage over Sophocles: it works (and works at best) when you're empty or near empty. So for those decks that operate at nearly empty, and also enjoy discards, Sightseer has slightly more situational value.

Otherwise, agreed, Sophocles is probably better for those decks that just want to discard a few cards (like Blacephalon).

 

[Otaku]

Hey you know I remember when people were talking about how sightseer would be a 4 of in every deck those people are now very quiet in this subject.

Try taking them off of your "Ignore" list.

I don't remember if I thought Sightseer was going to be true staple (4 of for every deck), but I do remember thinking it was going to see a lot more play than it has. I got that wrong. If you didn't read the comments where I've mentioned that, maybe it is just because you're not stalking me?

 

[AuraJackle]

Try taking them off of your "Ignore" list.

I don't remember if I thought Sightseer was going to be true staple (4 of for every deck), but I do remember thinking it was going to see a lot more play than it has. I got that wrong. If you didn't read the comments where I've mentioned that, maybe it is just because you're not stalking me?

Nah not talking about you your arguments are always welcome because I know you have experience but some others both off and on site who argued with me on this subject have yet to yield.

 

[TorchHG]

Sightseer has a specific advantage over Sophocles: it works (and works at best) when you're empty or near empty. So for those decks that operate at nearly empty, and also enjoy discards, Sightseer has slightly more situational value.

Otherwise, agreed, Sophocles is probably better for those decks that just want to discard a few cards (like Blacephalon).

I think this is the major point that differentiates between the two cards.

In general, decks that play larger hand sizes (or rather larger than 1 or 2 cards) will play Sophocles. As for decks that play smaller hand sizes will also benefit from Oranguru SUM. Honestly, the only deck I can think of that does that is Lost March, and discards aren’t always nice to you.

I really like this coversation

 

[OppositeAttract]

I think both cards aren't very good, but have situational value like Crasher Wake if you were playing a lot of waters. At this point I'm wondering if Ingo and Emmett might be marginally better than either card.

 

[The Almighty Bidoof]

I think both cards aren't very good, but have situational value like Crasher Wake if you were playing a lot of waters. At this point I'm wondering if Ingo and Emmett might be marginally better than either card.

I&E is a worse version of sightseer. What do you benefit from being forced to burn your whole hand over choosing how much you want to burn?

 

[OppositeAttract]

I&E is a worse version of sightseer. What do you benefit from being forced to burn your whole hand over choosing how much you want to burn?

Oh IDK the fact that you get to see your top card and then decide if you would like to take 5 cards from the top of your deck or bottom is advantageous for one. This is inherently a game of information and being able to see the first card and having the option to chose to draw from the bottom or top based on that information is good. Although, I understand the merit in wanting to sustain your resources especially if you need them next turn, decks that tend to run Sightseer want to discard and draw cards, having the option to keep cards in hand can also cause one to act too conservatively, negating the point of discarding and drawing cards.

Ultimately, I think both cards are pretty comparable and only said Ingo and Emmett may be marginally better, which in certain scenarios I see could that being the case. However, if you disagree that's also ok.