evolutions on is highly unlikely i would go on Breakthrough on because itll be healthier because we have to ditch shaymin ex, forest of giant plants and hoopa ex and other exes.
Discussion What sets are we thinking will get rotated after the season?
- Thread starter ztstephenson
- Start date
I think the furthest they'd be willing to push it would be Fates Collide-on. In the end, they want to make money, so watch the packaging trends. They still pack FC, BREAKthrough, and BREAKpoint boosters in the tins and box sets. I think they'd want these to remain relevant so people could "justify" buying them.
I see a lot of people saying the game isn't healthy right now. As a player who was around in the HGSS days with Primetime and The Truth, to the days with of Speed Darkrai winning two worlds, the game is in a great place. I don't see whats unhealthy about it. The ONLY card in the game I could see being considered unhealthy, is Forest of Giant Plants. Everything else is pretty balanced (yes, Shaymin EX is balanced). We have about about 6 decks that can be considered Tier 1, a HUGE increase from HGSS Meta and 2013 Worlds Meta where 2-3 decks won EVERYTHING. The rotation should only be three sets, (not the first time they've done a three set rotation), which still leaves us with Super Rod, Parallel City, and Brigette. Nothing else in the set matters, Mewtwo MAYBE depending on how Garbo shapes out, but in reality, we don't lose much by losing BKT, so it wouldn't be worth cutting. You could make the argument against it, saying that because we aren't losing anything, that's why it will rotate, but its not like it will change how the game is played by a big margin. Parallel is dying out to 0-1 copies in a deck in favor of newer, more synergistic stadiums. SR is the most useful out of the three, but even then, it only hurts very situational circumstances. Brigette is better in a Evolution based format, and searches GX with no restrictions, so it would be better if it stayed. A five set rotation would change the game entirely, since we lose a lot of Tier 1 decks with the loss of Max Elixer and FFB. Tapu-Koko dies, all three Dark Varients at the top die, both versions of water get set back, Volcanian would take a hit, any big basic deck, along with any turbo decks are dead. You want to see an unhealthy format? Make it to where there's a small number of decks with any kind of acceleration (Waterbox), or decks that have WAY too much stun (Quad Wobb, Quad Lapras and Sylveon GXwith not enough counter-acceleration (no Max Elixer), and you'll see an unhealthy format.
We would be losing float stone too if we lose bkt, but then again, because of field blower...not sure if it would be that important in the future meta..
It's important in expanded its still gonna be Important standard. tool removal or not
In a great place, or merely a better place?
I've been around in at least a casual capacity since the days of Base Set. Things are better now than at various points in the game's history, but that doesn't mean they are good. A side effect of having been around so long is the "wow" factor of "It is a TCG... with Pokémon!" has long since worn off, and I've begun to question a lot of things just accepted in general for many TCG games.
Only six decks with a cardpool this size?
This. 100% this. I have been saying from the beginning that the tool removal would have far less impact on standard than people were expecting and so far in games I have played, I think this has proven out. It limits ability lock Garbodor and provides a minor irritation, but by and large tool removal in standard looks exactly like tool removal in expanded. You see field blower hit 0 to 1 times on each side a game. Every now and then you see it twice by one side. What you don't see is wholesale tool removal gone wild.
Are your float stones safe? No. Are they "mostly" safe. Yep. They sure are. That is no different than how it is in expanded.
The problem with this quote, is that Pokemon doesn't release a random amount of sets a year, they are all set in stone, one every three months. so we know how many cards we have at a time for example, the HGSS format ended with ten major sets in total, however, the only defined meta we had with this rotation, was Primetime/The Truth from the start of the rotation, until the release of Noble Victories, which added Durant and Eel varients to the mix for three months. As soon as Next Destinies hit however, it changed the meta entirely. The only deck to survive the release was Eel variants. Celebi/Mewtwo/Tornadus, Donphan/Mewtwo/Rocky Helmet, and Eels were the new meta. With Darkrai variants being added in May, just before worlds. By the time Darkrai won its first worlds, we had a gigantic card pool (1025 cards from the 10 sets alone), but a clearly defined Top 3. It was just as bad the following year, with Plasma, American Gothic, and Darkrai (Worlds #2) winning EVERYTHING with 1044 cards within 9 sets to its name.Only six decks with a cardpool this size?
Since the start of the current meta, from what I've seen, started with Darkrai (both variants), M-Mewtwo, M-Ray, M-Gardevoir, Vespiqueen, Yveltal EX all fighting for a top spot. That's 7 decks, 5 of which have stayed in the Tier 1 spot today, with M-Gardevoir and Vespiqueen dropping to Tier 2. With the card pool that we have now only being 400 cards different in size (1402 to be exact, again, only main 12 sets were counted, if you want to get technical, you could argue that Double Crisis wasn't a real set, making it 1373 cards over 11 sets), it makes a statement that we have 6-9 decks that could be argued at close to Tier 1, depending on the results of the next major tournament.
That's why I say the game is in a healthy place. The meta is so diverse. You don't want it to be like CardFight Vanguard where EVERY deck is viable, because that ruins the competitive nature of the game and makes it to where whoever has better RNG wins, making it unhealthy, but you don't want it so defined that you can count the Tier 1 decks on one hand, and still have fingers left over.
Honestly I think one of the issues with the current meta is that certain types are basically fluff. Specifically metal and fighting types. Lighting to some extent too depending on how well koko plays out. It feels very rock paper scissors and if you aren't playing those types, you can win a few games, but are unlikely to do well in a major tournament.
I am not saying every deck needs to be viable, but it sucks that certain cards that could be good were they simply printed as another type get kicked to the curb due to general lack of support within that type.
Basically, it feels haphazard and it leads to a 3 month period where Decidueye dominates an entire meta with only one deck that really challenges it at all.
While yes, Fighting and Metal aren't that great right now, its perfectly fine. As someone who's favourite typing is metal, yes I would love to see M-Scizor, Metagross GX and Solgaleo GX be Tier 1 - Tier 2 good, but I also understand that it would be bad if EVERY typing had a meta deck. For example, Grass in the BW-Plasma days was literally unplayable, until we got Genesect EX. Fire was the same way. Yet Metal was Tier 1 with Gear Anti-EX. Certain types in certain meta's have to bite the bullet, its just how it goes. It just so happens that Metal and Fighting were the ones in this meta.
As far as this goes, it doesnt dominate as much as you ight think. If you look at recent Tournament reports, while yes it has a big showing in top cut, there's also several other decks right there with it.
The problem with the game is it isn't diverse. If you have 6 decks that all aim to do the same thing, then what is diverse in that? It's just do a lot of damage quickly and KO something with different color decks. If a decks core is the same as the next, its the same deck. I would much rather have a game where everything that aims to be competitive is viable in some way. This way, the game becomes less luck based and more skill based, which needs to happen.
Pokemon is a linear game. And only has two win conditions. Either deck-out, which isn't good in a faster meta, or prize win, in which we have pokemon worth 1/3 of your win condition.
Every deck does their win condition differently, we have stun like Vileplume and Sylveon. We have high damage like M-Mewtwo and M-Ray. Turbo with Darkrai and Volcanian. We even have high damage anti-ex decks like Vespiqueen and Garb that can compete with the big EX's and GX's, but only offer 1/6 the prize win condition. Yes there are multiple decks that do things similarly, but every deck has its own personality.
4 Professor Sycamore
2-3 N
1-2 Lysandre
1-3 Other Tech Supporters
4 Search Ball
4 VS Seeker
4 Trainer's Mail
3-5 Tools
2-3 Stadiums
6-12 Energy
Even at minimum, that's 31 cards, half your deck is just staples. Even if you cut some of these down, you won't get below 20 of your 60 cards being generic staples. That doesn't include Shaymin EX or Tapu-Lele EX, who are both considered staples. Field Blower, Switch items, Recovery such as super rod also aren't on that list. Most of my decks share the same 36-40 cards, because they are just staples. On average, you have about 20-25 cards to make a deck have its own identity and develop its own win condition.
This isn't true of all decks, which is why they are the same. Quad decks, Stall/Mill decks, healing decks operate differently.
Wait, what? I'm confused by your statement. Are you saying certain decks don't follow this pattern, so they are different?
You say that all deck are the same, high damage with different colors, yet you say: "Quad decks, Stall/Mill decks, healing decks operate differently." The point of Quad/Stall/Mill/Disruption based decks, is to take away your opponents advantage to where the game state is very basic. Energy/hand removal, board displacement, mechanic lock, these are all variants of disruption and stun. Vileplume locks you out of the item mechanic to progress your game state, making it hard for you to do your decks win condition. Sylveon has energy/hand removal and board displacement, Quad Lapras has energy/hand removal. All are stun decks who disrupt your opponents advantages to bring the games state to a slow pace. and win via deck out, or making it hard for your opponent to counter attack. All stun, all disruptive, all different in their own ways. So I'm confused when you say the meta is do a lot of damage with different colors, yet some of the Tier 1 contending decks are stun decks.
I disagree with this. There is nothing stopping pokemon from creating cards in each type along with support for each type that would allow those decks to succeed without saturating the market with insane decks. Take the new Sylveon deck. That gives Fairy decks a distinct deck that will be competitive and appears to use similar strengths of some of the fairy cards from XY keeping it in line with its type so to speak (the strengths being search your deck for x card and blah blah blah like Xerneas and Florges EX...guessing there are more, but those were the main ones I can think of). They could just as easily add additional support into the game to allow fighting to effectively stack damage amplification or to more effectively allow metal decks to take a hit / stop incoming damage altogether while dishing out punishment. Pokemon could do this in a way that adds two more tournament viable decks to the mix. That isn't some insane number of decks to have work. That's two more types that could be helped with only a couple of cards while providing a unique approach to deck building that would appeal to different people.
To be honest, I think the only *real* thing stopping this from actually working is the ridiculous x2 weakness mechanic. It is broken and should be revised to something like +20 or +40. Make it hurt to get hit by an opposing type. Don't make it crippling. M Mewtwo should be one of the most powerful pokemon in the game...but it is reduced to a pile of rubble simply by putting 6 items in a discard pile and getting trashalanched. That's ridiculous.
Anyway, I will get off my soap box.
Your claim was the meta is diverse because six or so top tier decks exist. My counter claim is these decks are the same at their core. Speed and power is what these decks do, it's just we call one of them Turbo Dark and the other Volcanion. These decks as well as the other tier one decks operate this way so those decks use that core. Mill decks don't run the core you posted above because they can't in favor of other cards. They don't need to be fast, just disruptive.
In order to measure how diverse the meta is, we need to look at the over all styles of play that are viable. Sure there aren't that many styles of play but the one people favor are fast, aggro decks and the color of paint they wear doesn't change that.
As stated above, Weakness is a problem in the game right now. It should be at least +20 damage.
The difference between Volcanian and Turbo Dark, is the play style of the decks. One is an EnergyBoard deck, that need lost of energy on board, and stay on board, to do damage. It does this by using Max Elixer, Yveltal (normal), and EXP.Share, making you think and choose how you want energy to be placed, and tools to be placed. Volcanian is much more of an assembly line deck. It uses the method of dumping energy for damage (starts the cycle), recovering them to the hand (the imperfect product, which will be recycled to make the final product), with the energy attaching to the field for late game power of Volcanian EX (the finished product). Both do high damage, both are considered to be turbo decks, but both play very differently.
If you really think that all the meta decks do are high damage with different colors, then i question your knowledge of how the decks play. Each deck has a different play style. do they do high damage, yes, because the best win condition in the game right now is the 6-prize condition. And you build your decks to play to that condition. You cant tell me that every turbo deck is the same, just because they have the same generalizes benefits to them. That's like saying Tier 1 decks are all the same because they are good.
The play style of decks like M-Gardevoir and M-Ray are very different even though you can generalize them as Mega Decks that need to play Skyfield, and do tons of damage. Even Turbo Dark and Darkrai-Dragons aren't the same, because they have different play styles. I don't see where any of the top decks in the game are the same,or any decks at all for that matter. Each one wants to arrive at the same 6-Prize goal, but the all do it differently. There are decks that want to reach the Deck out goal as well, and while they may not have the same staples, they all play differently from on another.
You can't have too diverse a meta. Because once everything is Tier 1, games are based on coin-flips rather than playing the game. For example, Cardfight Vanguard is a game that I quit pokemon to play, because I felt pokemon was headed in a bad direction (right after worlds 2013). In vanguard, you attack your opponent to get them to six damage. Many decks did this in different ways. Field control, Turbo Decks, Board Spam,, Tagging out during battle phase for more attackers, making some attackers able to attack multiple times. You name the strat, it was in the game. The problem, was that the 20+ clans all had a build that was competitive, and that mean that if you lost the coin flip, you lost. you were inherently behind, and because all the decks were on the same level, you couldn't catch up. Needless to say, the game is very unhealthy and that's why i came back to pokemon.
Meta's where EVERYTHING is on the same level, are just bad, they have no skill to them, and are decided by a coin flip. So by making some cards inherently better than others, you prevent this. Yes, you could give each typing a theme, but the problem with that, is that some themes will just be better than others.
Metal: Defensive, Damage Reduction
Dark: Play around the Sleep Special condition maybe?
Psychic: Damage counters or Confusion.
Water: Flooding board with energy from the hand?
Grass: Spamming Pokemon on the board or poison?
Fire: Burn?
Normal: High damage?
Dragon: Splashability in other decks
Fighting: Self-Damage or Enhacing each-others attack power
Lighting: Paralysis?
Fairy: Healing
That's basically what it would look like, but the problem with that, is that Water would be jacked since its the only one with any acceleration built in, the special condition ones would be dead because of retreat and switch methods. Psychic with damage counters would be ok but would lose to anything that says "prevent effects". Metal, Fairy, Normal, Grass, and Fighting might be ok depending on energy cost and power level. You can't make the typing of a pokemon an archetype, thats what sets it apart from the other TCG's. Thats what makes it unique. Its a card game, there are good cards, there are bad cards. There's a meta where X type shines and a meta where X type is dead. It keeps the game fresh and new every format. Not to mention the decks like Vespiqueen who have multiple types of pokemon in them, or decks that have teams to them like Aqua or Magma, which have pokemon of different typings in them.
Sky Field decks are a thing. I believe three or so exist so we can say this is a style of play but even these decks are Turbo decks. I do agree it's not fair to say these decks are the same but their function is and that is be fast. We can say Sky Field is a subset of the Turbo deck since not all Mega decks play that way. Vespiquen is also a Turbo Deck despite being Evolution based. Volcanion and Turbo Dark are the same deck at their core, and that's do a lot of damage and get OHKOs should the cards are good. For example, my Mega Pidgeot deck is a tempo deck, which is a play style. It can be fast or slow and still do what it needs to do. It still aims to take six Prize cards but does it a different way than throw the deck at the opponent.
Don't confuse bad game mechanics for the health of a meta. If a player who won a coin flip won the game most of the time, the problem is else where because a meta where you can play any deck competitively and get results, that sounds like a good time. The problem with Pokemon is they make overpowered cards with no way to beat them so most of the time, a Decidueye/Vileplume deck going first means that player won.
Also, the archetypes you listed are just a dream because Pokemon types don't work that way.
That makes no sense. M-Ray and Vesipqueen are not turbo decks. Just because a deck gets to its win condition fast, doesn't mean its turbo, its called consistency. You're generalizing WAY too hard here.
I'm not arguing that they occasionally make broken cards, look at LuxChomp for example. But saying a deck is broken, even though its proven to be beaten multiple times, and saying the meta is unhealthy is, quite frankly, bad. You say a "every deck wins" meta sounds good, but its not. Play CFV if you feel that way, you'll see how bad it is. Its skill-less, noncompetitive, and boring. There aren't any "broken" cards in the game right now, everything is balanced. The meta is well rounded, yet diverse. The game is healthy.