Weakness and Resistance

[crystal_pidgeot]

Damage output in the game is high. So high in fact that taking a 2x weakness hit is almost a death sentence. Keldeo's Sacred Sword does 50+ damage for 3 colorless energy. It most cases, it's a 4HKO, which isn't that great, but against fire type Pokemon, it does 100 damage, which is a HUGE jump. We are talking 2 turns vs 4. Bigger Pokemon can hit 200+ on Weakness hits.

Resistance on the other hand feels like it is completely useless. All Pokemon now have just a -20 resistance, which I find as odd because in the Base set days, Weakness was -30 when damage output was MUCH lower. We get high output Pokemon and they reduce the Resistance to -20. Nowadays, no Pokemon cares much if something resist it. If a Pokemon now has -20 Resistance to fire and a fire type attacks it for 120, the Pokemon that resist still takes base 100 damage before adding any damage modifiers, still keeping the Pokemon in a 2HKO range, which doesn't do it any good.

With the game being as offensive as it is, you would think resistance would be much larger. While reducing the damage by half seems like the best idea, just from a math standpoint, it would be a nightmare. Pokemon can do 130 and the way HP is setup, 65 points of damage is just odd (while I still think this can work) but then we have to round certain number if something comes down to like 75.5. It just makes things harder and would give the judges more work to do, which is something I don't want but I feel something needs to happen with resisted hits.

I was thinking something like -60 for resisted hits, which is a high number but Resistance should be a huge factor in the game. Changing Resistance would change the game since matchups become more important and deck builds will consist of more than one attacking type (like the Pokemon VG) since Resistance could ruin a match.

This would lead to more defensive play meaning decks could do a lot more when against a better matchup for it. Toad EX would not be able to break that -60 resistance. Alternatively, we could just reduce overall damage of attacks and go back to a +20 Weakness format, while leaving Resistance as -20, which effectively does the same thing to a certain extent but I do feel Resistance should have some kind of relevance in determining matchup.

 

[Otaku]

I agree with the basic premise (Weakness and Resistance are out of whack) but I favor the inverse approach: weakening Weakness.

Resisting my usual impulse to prattle on and on, multipliers are harder to balance out than adding or subtracting to things like damage done. The game is not a simple rock-paper-scissors fest because there are too many of such relationships interact like RPS and even if there wasn't... do you really want that kind of environment where you have to win, lose or tie based on one thing? Even without reducing it to that extreme, how much should a lucky Type matching matter?

The-powers-that-be need to set Weakness to a flat amount, at least for a while. Possibly go the route we saw during the DP and Platinum sets where Weakness could be +10 to +40 (yeah, some things were x2 but it wasn't the norm and I still would prefer avoiding it). I think +20 is plenty; it is a free Muscle Band against some stuff, just like Resistance is a free Hard Charm.

 

[crystal_pidgeot]

I agree with the basic premise (Weakness and Resistance are out of whack) but I favor the inverse approach: weakening Weakness.

Resisting my usual impulse to prattle on and on, multipliers are harder to balance out than adding or subtracting to things like damage done. The game is not a simple rock-paper-scissors fest because there are too many of such relationships interact like RPS and even if there wasn't... do you really want that kind of environment where you have to win, lose or tie based on one thing? Even without reducing it to that extreme, how much should a lucky Type matching matter?

The-powers-that-be need to set Weakness to a flat amount, at least for a while. Possibly go the route we saw during the DP and Platinum sets where Weakness could be +10 to +40 (yeah, some things were x2 but it wasn't the norm and I still would prefer avoiding it). I think +20 is plenty; it is a free Muscle Band against some stuff, just like Resistance is a free Hard Charm.

+20 across the board seems like a nice number. I would even say something like +40 weakness and -40 resistance just to keep some other pokemon relevant. Colorless Pokemon draw the short end of the stick though so they should just deal more overall damage to compensate.

 

[Otaku]

+20 across the board seems like a nice number. I would even say something like +40 weakness and -40 resistance just to keep some other pokemon relevant. Colorless Pokemon draw the short end of the stick though so they should just deal more overall damage to compensate.

Whoa friend... be careful not to get ahead of yourself.

+20 is the same bump something gets from a Muscle Band. I don't trust the game's designers with more (not that they are incompetent, but rather I can't stand the direction they have been taking for so long*). Colorless Pokémon, if they remain neutral, don't need to hit harder (especially at the +/-20 level): by being neutral they avoid a similar drawback to the bonus. It seems a bit easier to exploit Weakness than Resistance, but I that doesn't seem like too big of a problem. At the very least, that would be a step or two later if it was needed at all.

Or of course they could move to keep it super simple and just do away with Weakness and Resistance as general mechanics. I mean they already have a lot of issues from trying to adapt the video game Types and Type interactions to the TCG.

*crystal_pidgeot already knows but I keep sticking around hoping things will get better, plus if I leave all the time and effort invested in this game seems wasted. =P

 

[crystal_pidgeot]

Whoa friend... be careful not to get ahead of yourself.

+20 is the same bump something gets from a Muscle Band. I don't trust the game's designers with more (not that they are incompetent, but rather I can't stand the direction they have been taking for so long*). Colorless Pokémon, if they remain neutral, don't need to hit harder (especially at the +/-20 level): by being neutral they avoid a similar drawback to the bonus. It seems a bit easier to exploit Weakness than Resistance, but I that doesn't seem like too big of a problem. At the very least, that would be a step or two later if it was needed at all.

Or of course they could move to keep it super simple and just do away with Weakness and Resistance as general mechanics. I mean they already have a lot of issues from trying to adapt the video game Types and Type interactions to the TCG.

*crystal_pidgeot already knows but I keep sticking around hoping things will get better, plus if I leave all the time and effort invested in this game seems wasted. =P

I can see that but its the fact that all colorless Pokemon are weak to something but can hit back for weakness if it isn't through the use of an ability or trainer card. They could use the buff but I think this is because I want the bird/flying to get its own typing in the TCG. What would be nice to see again are Pokemon with double or triple weakness.

 

[Pikachu6319]

I think the best idea would be what they did with DP:

Basics have +10 weakness and +10 resistance.
Stage 1's have +20 weakness and +20 resistance.
Stage 2's have +30 weakness and +30 resistance.

What about Megas? My first thought is that they should be +40/+40 but that might be just a bit much since megas are so easy to get out. They might be better off at the stage 2 level.

EX's? Again my first thought would be the stage 2 level but they're already very strong and act as a basic not to mention a select few, like Skarmory and Emolga, are in fact basics anyway. Maybe they should follow the same basic rules.

But should they all follow the same rules? Should a legendary Pokémon like Articuno or Arceus be forced to follow the same rules as basic Pokémon like Rattata and Bidoof? Should the legendaries be put up in a higher stable because of what they are? I would say yes but I concede that it could make things more complicated than they need to be.

But the other inherent problem with weakness/resistance is that while just about every Pokémon has a weakness in tcg whereas most Pokémon aren't given resistances.

I too would think it kind of cool to see Pokémon with double or triple weakness, as it happens in tvg as well. But the flip side is what about double or triple resistances? And what happens if those ever clash due to differences in tcg vs tvg, which side should win out?

Of course that follows another course, the question of why Pokémon can't be two types at once? Obviously I don't expect them to make Espeon a dual type just because but they could make a Grass/Psychic Venusaur line with two appropriate level weaknesses (Fire and Psychic) and two appropriate resistances (water and fighting).

 

[Pinecone]

Why not both? Some Pokemon have +__ weakness, other have x2. One might say this would be confusing, but it would give the TCG some of the intricacies that the VG has. It just becomes something you need to be more aware, which adds depth to card interaction. It would be more complex than a uniform design, but it shouldn't be confusing as it would all be on the card, clear as day.

As great as +__ or both might be, x2 weakness is a lot easier on the devs, so don't expect it to change anytime soon.

 

[crystal_pidgeot]

@Pikachu6319

I don't think the TCG should treat legendary Pokemon any differently than normal evolving basic Pokemon from a mechanic standpoint, since like all other Pokemon, you have some cards that are clearly better so punishing the less powerful ones pretty much makes them useless.

I don't think double or triple resistance on cards would be all that bad. We could see a Pidgeot with a [F] and [P] resistance, which gives the card more interactions. Since it can't hit anything in the game for weakness, it would be a nice trade off. This would also balance out a lot of other cards. If Dragon types were weak to colorless, dragon and fairy types at the same time, they become less powerful since 3 different card types can hit them for lots of damage but making Weakness not x2 means a player wanting to play a pure Dragon deck doesn't auto lose to any fairy deck. This would also bring in other cards that could allow for x2 Weakness through different effects.

As for making some Pokemon dual type, I don't see why not. Delta Species was one of my favorite blocks because it completely changed the meta. Getting to play a Lightining and Metal type Pidgeot was pretty cool.

@Pinecone

If I remember correctly, all of the Lv. X Pokemon had x2 Weakness while other cards were like +10 through +30 weakness. If adding stuff like this becomes too much for the devs, I suggest they make less cards (something like 60 per set) and make them balance.

 

[Otaku]

I think the best idea would be what they did with DP...

Why not both?

If I remember correctly, all of the Lv. X Pokemon had x2 Weakness while other cards were like +10 through +30 weakness.

Forgive me because I have to be careful as it is so easy for me to just repeat myself and ignore what others are saying, so this is a question:

Why will it work this time?

Varying the amount of the damage bonus for Weakness (and damage deduction for Resistance!) was tried in the DP and Platinum sets, but it was then abandoned and we went back to the x2 Weakness. That makes me think there was a reason for it and unless they wanted games to have wild swings based purely on type-matching, I can only think of doing it to streamline the game (which was also one of the reasons given at the time for going to the BW-era first turn rules). Though I suspect that wild damage swings based on type's exploiting Weakness is something else they desired.

As I don't like handing out such a variable bonus because of the incredible shifts in damage being done, that is why I suggested a flat 20. If the designers are going to add more detail, first I'll take Evolving Basics and Stage 1 forms that are actually useful. Preferably with fully Evolved Pokémon (that includes non-Evolving Basics) all balanced against each other, so that the Stage just determines your path and not your overall potency... and maybe after a few other things, revisit variable Resistance levels again.

(Okay, now when you disagree with me I'll know it is officially because you don't agree with my premises or this line of reasoning. )

 

[crystal_pidgeot]

Forgive me because I have to be careful as it is so easy for me to just repeat myself and ignore what others are saying, so this is a question:

Why will it work this time?

Varying the amount of the damage bonus for Weakness (and damage deduction for Resistance!) was tried in the DP and Platinum sets, but it was then abandoned and we went back to the x2 Weakness. That makes me think there was a reason for it and unless they wanted games to have wild swings based purely on type-matching, I can only think of doing it to streamline the game (which was also one of the reasons given at the time for going to the BW-era first turn rules). Though I suspect that wild damage swings based on type's exploiting Weakness is something else they desired.

As I don't like handing out such a variable bonus because of the incredible shifts in damage being done, that is why I suggested a flat 20. If the designers are going to add more detail, first I'll take Evolving Basics and Stage 1 forms that are actually useful. Preferably with fully Evolved Pokémon (that includes non-Evolving Basics) all balanced against each other, so that the Stage just determines your path and not your overall potency... and maybe after a few other things, revisit variable Resistance levels again.

(Okay, now when you disagree with me I'll know it is officially because you don't agree with my premises or this line of reasoning. )

We don't know why it went away. The only reason I can think of is there was some powerful cards like Gyarados that could attack for free and deal huge damage and his +20 or 30 weakness made a lot of decks to deal with it. Maybe the x2 weakness is the easiest way to deal with powerful Pokemon since 1 good attack can OHKO it.

If this is in fact the reason, perhaps we can see Pokemon with weaknesses to 2 or more types to balance the card a little bit more. That would be something worth exploring because some pokemon types are overpowered because their weaknesses aren't used.

 

[Otaku]

We don't know why it went away. The only reason I can think of is there was some powerful cards like Gyarados that could attack for free and deal huge damage and his +20 or 30 weakness made a lot of decks to deal with it. Maybe the x2 weakness is the easiest way to deal with powerful Pokemon since 1 good attack can OHKO it.

If this is in fact the reason, perhaps we can see Pokemon with weaknesses to 2 or more types to balance the card a little bit more. That would be something worth exploring because some pokemon types are overpowered because their weaknesses aren't used.

How many cards are really overpowered because they lack multiple Weaknesses though?

Just like we don't know for sure why the x2 Weakness mechanic was abandoned initially and then returned, we don't know that any particular card we might consider overpowered would actually have gotten the appropriate Weaknesses were they allowed. In many cases, a Pokémon name is just that... a name. If one big Basic would have a crippling Weakness then the powers-that-be might have intentionally used another or (as they have done in the past) simply chosen to leave off a few. Overpowered cards in general are just that: overpowered.

I don't like it when any card can get an easy and seemingly undeserved win because it lucked out with Type matching. Sometimes exploiting Weakness involves skill* such as reading a metagame and taking a solid attacker who isn't quite up to snuff but then winning an entire tournament because you knew it would have favorable match-ups thanks (at least in part) due to Weakness, going from "average" to "awesome" attacker status. When you get a first round loss because someone was playing a clearly substandard deck or playing an established deck quite poorly or sometimes even both but you just couldn't overcome the advantage they enjoyed due to Weakness also just happening to go in their favor, it really stings. Keep in mind, given my level of skill I'm more likely to be the guy winning because of Weakness, in spite of low skill and/or a questionable deck. ^^'

*Sorry if the bold text comes across as shouting; I've too often had the preceding kind of statement misread so that because sometimes it involves almost pure luck incorrectly taken as all examples of [insert thing] are pure luck.