Discussion What sets are we thinking will get rotated after the season?

[crystal_pidgeot]

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.

You can have consistent turbo decks and consistent decks that aren't turbo. I prefer the term "throw the deck" at the opponent.

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.

LuxChomp wasn't broken, it was consistent. Power Spray was questionable but every SP deck could run it. In a meta where a player can take any deck to a tournament and get results is a good one. It means the only factor (besides drawing well) is the player's skill. I don't play CFV, because I'm only interested in playing decks with birds and if I could build something decent, then I would play but I don't see having a well balanced card game is a bad thing.

Things are bad in Pokemon. They refuse to ban unhealthy cards from the game (something that seems to be changing), they refuse to make counters for decks that have dominated the game and if they do, its FAR too late to be effective (Karen, Field Blower, Oricorio) and game mechanics are broken. Staged Pokemon (unless they are really good Stage 1 Pokemon) are unplayable, the pace of the game is too fast given the kind of game it is, cards are unbalanced and Weakness is broken. There's little to no skill in Pokemon. It's just play solitaire, hope the opponent bricks/ get a matchup where you win because of weakness and act like you're good at the game. There is very little player interaction in this game and little room for counter play. The refusal of simple TCG mechanics like a side board prevents the game from being a deep as it could be and most of the cards in sets are regarded as filler, no matter how good a card is because it's not Darkrai or some other card that shouldn't still exist in the game. If the worst thing I have to worry about is actual diverse meta, then I'm playing the wrong game.

 

[TheDude133]

You can have consistent turbo decks and consistent decks that aren't turbo. I prefer the term "throw the deck" at the opponent.




LuxChomp wasn't broken, it was consistent. Power Spray was questionable but every SP deck could run it. In a meta where a player can take any deck to a tournament and get results is a good one. It means the only factor (besides drawing well) is the player's skill. I don't play CFV, because I'm only interested in playing decks with birds and if I could build something decent, then I would play but I don't see having a well balanced card game is a bad thing.

Things are bad in Pokemon. They refuse to ban unhealthy cards from the game (something that seems to be changing), they refuse to make counters for decks that have dominated the game and if they do, its FAR too late to be effective (Karen, Field Blower, Oricorio) and game mechanics are broken. Staged Pokemon (unless they are really good Stage 1 Pokemon) are unplayable, the pace of the game is too fast given the kind of game it is, cards are unbalanced and Weakness is broken. There's little to no skill in Pokemon. It's just play solitaire, hope the opponent bricks/ get a matchup where you win because of weakness and act like you're good at the game. There is very little player interaction in this game and little room for counter play. The refusal of simple TCG mechanics like a side board prevents the game from being a deep as it could be and most of the cards in sets are regarded as filler, no matter how good a card is because it's not Darkrai or some other card that shouldn't still exist in the game. If the worst thing I have to worry about is actual diverse meta, then I'm playing the wrong game.

Ok, let me put it to you this way:

1: LuxChomp was broken, it was a Tier 0 deck.

2:There are no unhealthy cards in the game right now save MAYBE forest of giant plants.

3:Counters to decks that domonate the game? Wobbuffet.

4:Staged Pokemon aren't useless. See any Mega deck (same mechanics as Stage 1), Greninja and Xerneas Break, Vespiqueen, Garbodor, Sylveon GX, Vileplume.

5:The game isn't that quick. Everything is just consistent.

6: There has never been opponent interaction in Pokemon TCG.

7:Weakness isn't that broken. The only reason people think it is, is because EX's and GX's are two prizes. No one cared about 2x weakness in the HGSS days because everything was a 1 prize kill.

8:The rotation has been a thing since the beginning, things "still" being in the game doesn't apply, because you know when they are going out of the game.

9: Like I've said countless times, having every deck be good is a bad thing. It removes player skill, and wins the game off a coin-flip. Think of it like this, if everyone is special, no one is special. If all decks are just as good as everything else, that means that you are inherently behind from the start, therefore behind, and since your decks progression is the same as theirs, you both progress at the same rate, meaning you will always be behind going second.

10: Just because a deck gets to its win condition quick doesn't make it a turbo deck. You can look at every deck, and say its "x" turbo, even if its a stun deck. For example, vileplume is a stun deck, but its "vileplume turbo". Sylveon is a stun deck, but it's a "search turbo" deck. Having +1's in a deck, doesn't make it turbo, it makes it consistent.

 

[Otaku]

Only six decks with a cardpool this size?

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.

You never explain the actual problem with the quote from my previous post.

In fact, what you go on to say would support my claim that it is a problem. Pokémon isn't releasing cards all willy nilly. I would hope they at least plan a few expansions ahead so that they have an idea of the direction they plan on taking the game. I really don't want to count how many unique cards have been released in each Standard legal set (including promos). From XY: Primal Clash to Sun & Moon, less Double Crisis and Generations (as they were not typical releases), is 11 expansions. Ignoring the Secret Rares, some have well over 100 cards, some are just shy of 100, and some are just over 100. I'm going to estimate 100 cards per set, and that means 1100 cards. If every one of those six decks were unique, with no repeated cards, that would mean 600 cards make up the competitive metagame. Rounding up, that would mean the competitive metagame consists of 55% of the actual cards released. Sound good? What is a 55% worth on most exams? I get it; a TCG is not an exam, it is a business, but I think our standards for a "good" TCG are far too low.

That was my point. If we have six major kinds of decks, but they are broken up into distinct play styles and have several subvariants, we are doing better. Like @crystal_pidgeot, I do not care for how the Pokémon TCG has been evolving towards dueling solitaire. Win the coin flip, and unless you misplay or suffer some bad luck, your deck goes off and you win. When this happens, there is little difference between a control/disruption deck, a beatdown deck, and a mill deck (not that we have a high power mill deck).

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 previously stated, even if the present metagame is better than what we had at the time, that doesn't mean it is good. I also don't know if it would be a fair comparison (possibly in your favor) due to stuff like different first turn rules. For the HS-On format, I seem to recall a few more decks that at least enjoyed 15 minutes of fame (and competitive success). Off the top of my head, how about Magneboar? Maybe by the end, most of these weren't competitive... but we aren't at the end of the current metagame, either. You might be able to celebrate an even more diverse metagame by the twilight of the 2016-2017 Modified Format, or it could constrict even further.

Since it may have been lost, my point is that most players don't demand enough from their TCGs in general. We've almost all played worse games, and so we accept what is better without questioning if it is really as good as it ought to be. If you don't agree... fine. I'm thinking we don't have a lot of common ground. The good news is I can't stop you from enjoying the game.

 

[TheDude133]

You never explain the actual problem with the quote from my previous post.

In fact, what you go on to say would support my claim that it is a problem. Pokémon isn't releasing cards all willy nilly. I would hope they at least plan a few expansions ahead so that they have an idea of the direction they plan on taking the game. I really don't want to count how many unique cards have been released in each Standard legal set (including promos). From XY: Primal Clash to Sun & Moon, less Double Crisis and Generations (as they were not typical releases), is 11 expansions. Ignoring the Secret Rares, some have well over 100 cards, some are just shy of 100, and some are just over 100. I'm going to estimate 100 cards per set, and that means 1100 cards. If every one of those six decks were unique, with no repeated cards, that would mean 600 cards make up the competitive metagame. Rounding up, that would mean the competitive metagame consists of 55% of the actual cards released. Sound good? What is a 55% worth on most exams? I get it; a TCG is not an exam, it is a business, but I think our standards for a "good" TCG are far too low.

That was my point. If we have six major kinds of decks, but they are broken up into distinct play styles and have several subvariants, we are doing better. Like @crystal_pidgeot, I do not care for how the Pokémon TCG has been evolving towards dueling solitaire. Win the coin flip, and unless you misplay or suffer some bad luck, your deck goes off and you win. When this happens, there is little difference between a control/disruption deck, a beatdown deck, and a mill deck (not that we have a high power mill deck).



As previously stated, even if the present metagame is better than what we had at the time, that doesn't mean it is good. I also don't know if it would be a fair comparison (possibly in your favor) due to stuff like different first turn rules. For the HS-On format, I seem to recall a few more decks that at least enjoyed 15 minutes of fame (and competitive success). Off the top of my head, how about Magneboar? Maybe by the end, most of these weren't competitive... but we aren't at the end of the current metagame, either. You might be able to celebrate an even more diverse metagame by the twilight of the 2016-2017 Modified Format, or it could constrict even further.

Since it may have been lost, my point is that most players don't demand enough from their TCGs in general. We've almost all played worse games, and so we accept what is better without questioning if it is really as good as it ought to be. If you don't agree... fine. I'm thinking we don't have a lot of common ground. The good news is I can't stop you from enjoying the game.

Without dissecting each part of the comment, let me give one general comment, one that I've said in basically every comment I've made. You all want more decks in the meta, but don't realize how bad that is for a TCG.

Pokemon has always been solitaire. There isn't anything to stop what your opponent is doing during their turn. To my memory, I don't think any card in the game as ever let you do any action during your opponents turn. This isn't a bad thing though, obviously with how successful Pokemon is. Now, when I think of a good TCG, the top three are Magic, Pokemon, and Yugioh, in that order. Magic being the most skillful, Yugioh being the most pay-to-win, and Pokemon being the most kid friendly. You act like just because the game isn't "Every deck can win", it's a bad game. I still don't even understand why people think this format is so bad, or what is unhealthy about the game.

As far as the math goes for cards per set vs how many meta decks there are, I did the math to an extent, covering the total numbers of the main sets, regardless of double printings, or reprints, because it really doesn't matter. In every TCG, you have good cards, and you have bad cards. You need to make good cards to keep the secondary market alive, and bad cards to show why you need the good cards. It's simple economics. If EVERY card was good, then none would be worth anything. If 75% of cards would be good, then the price goes up a little. The smaller that percentage is, the higher cost of certain cards, therefore resulting in a more demanded set, therefore making pokemon print more, therefore making more money from vendors. Stop acting like this game is just for fun, its still a business, we are still consumers, buying product, from a business, they have to make money somehow. Do you think someone just walked into Pokemon and said "Hey, you know what would make people enjoy the game more? Lets release this Shaymin EX" No, they planned the card from the beginning, knew that demand for the card would be high, printed it, and made a ton of profit off the Roaring Skies set. I could go into 100 analogies for this, but you get my point.

My biggest question is why people think the game is in an unhealthy state? Diverse meta, no broken cards, and it's mostly cheap to play save 2 cards.

 

[Dave Summers]

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).

Well, tell me how Tapu Lele GX ISN'T an unhealthy card: Average Basic EX/GX HP, a pretty great ability that makes it a must-have card for any competitive deck (remember Lapras from Ex: Legend Maker and Jirachi EX?), pretty great attack that has been appearing nonstop since BW: Next Destinies and works with any kind of energy, kinda meh GX Move, literally no weakness, 1 retreat...

By now the game designers should have few brain cells alive. I was quite happy with the first SM set, except with reprints of old timers like Ultra Ball and Crushing Hammer, but SM2 was quite the shock.

 

[Latte1504]

Well, tell me how Tapu Lele GX ISN'T an unhealthy card: Average Basic EX/GX HP, a pretty great ability that makes it a must-have card for any competitive deck (remember Lapras from Ex: Legend Maker and Jirachi EX?), pretty great attack that has been appearing nonstop since BW: Next Destinies and works with any kind of energy, kinda meh GX Move, literally no weakness, 1 retreat...

I heard it best explained this way: "It is a consistency card that you aren't punished for playing."

 

[TheDude133]

Well, tell me how Tapu Lele GX ISN'T an unhealthy card: Average Basic EX/GX HP, a pretty great ability that makes it a must-have card for any competitive deck (remember Lapras from Ex: Legend Maker and Jirachi EX?), pretty great attack that has been appearing nonstop since BW: Next Destinies and works with any kind of energy, kinda meh GX Move, literally no weakness, 1 retreat...

By now the game designers should have few brain cells alive. I was quite happy with the first SM set, except with reprints of old timers like Ultra Ball and Crushing Hammer, but SM2 was quite the shock.

An ability you will only use once or twice a game, by then, all your supporters are in the discard and VS Seeker targets. It's good in very minuscule situations, otherwise its a walking Random Receiver. Its nothing more than a set up ability that has less utility over the entire coarse of the game than shaymin ex. Its attack is useless in meta where 2-3 energy attackers are running around with more than 200 hp, meaning it cant 2HKO anything. Yes Choice Band exists, but so does field blower. Not to mention that with its HP, its in OHKO range of a lot of attackers in the game right now. Weakness is useless in a meta where everything gets one-shot anyways, and as far as 1 retreat goes > Float Stone, Alter of the Moone, Escape Rope, Switch, Olympia. The card is good, but no broken. Mewtwo EX was insane back in the day because of its OHKO potential. The fact that we had cards like Blastiose and Eelectrik to flood Mewtwo with energy to OHKO Blastiose, Eels, or any basic pokemon attacker like Zekrom. Its the same reason Lugia EX isn't busted right now, because it's never going to OHKO anything. If you think that Lele is broken, then you have never played in a truly broken format like LuxChomp. Lele is a card that shouldn't be played at more than two, and even then, you only play it at two so you guarantee seeing it at least once even if one is prized. Lele isnt game changing. It didn't shape a meta around a single card. It's just another support pokemon that you only attack with when backed in a corner. You say its broken because its hyped, but when you actually look at the card, its no more broken than any other card in the game right now.

Edit: Mewtwo EX upon release killed the top three decks of its time. Primetime, The Truth, and Durant Mill, and completely reshaped the game. Tapu-Lele GX just makes good decks better.

 

[Otaku]

My biggest question is why people think the game is in an unhealthy state? Diverse meta, no broken cards, and it's mostly cheap to play save 2 cards.

I can't speak for everyone, but I disagree with most of your assertions. Sometimes I reject your data, other times I agree with the data but reject your interpretation of it. I was rather wordy, so let us just focus on a few snippets.

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.

You are citing a failure of game design, and misattributing the cause. When the coin flip to go first decides things, that means the first turn rules are not properly balanced. Most TCGs I have played suffer from this, but some suffer more than others. The few that do it well find a way to make it so that it is not clear whether you are better served going first or second.

Your statement seems to assume that Equality = sameness. It doesn't.

So I completely reject this point.

If EVERY card was good, then none would be worth anything. If 75% of cards would be good, then the price goes up a little. The smaller that percentage is, the higher cost of certain cards, therefore resulting in a more demanded set, therefore making pokemon print more, therefore making more money from vendors. Stop acting like this game is just for fun, its still a business, we are still consumers, buying product, from a business, they have to make money somehow.

You accuse others of not considering this from a business standpoint, but your only support is deeply flawed reasoning, which makes it seem like a personal attack more than an argument.

You have to prove that if every card was good, that they'd be worth nothing. If every card was equally good, then card rarity and popularity would affect demand, ultimately determining the price. Assuming the rarity scheme isn't changing, the most expensive cards would not be as expensive, but the least expensive cards aren't going to be as inexpensive, either. A lot of this game is glorified filler, resulting in cards only collectors (whether general or specialized) really want. The secondary market benefits the powers-that-be only in that it can help feed the primary market... but usually, by the time the secondary market demand really matters, the primary market is done; TPCi has sold to distributors, which in turn have sold to vendors.

The one set in recent history to receive an additional print run is further proof your statements are wrong. Most sets have at least a few card cards, and the one set to receive an additional print run had several. Even if it only happened for Shaymin-EX, it is still an outlier to the whole situation. Vendors aren't particular about whether people are buying packs in the hopes of pulling that one super-special-awesome card, or buying packs because every card in the pack is good so even if you don't get what you want, you get cards you can trade for what you want.

This is likely my last comment to you on the matter. If I have not convinced you to at least rethink some of your stances, I see no point in asking for more of your time nor spending more of mine on the matter.

 

[crystal_pidgeot]

The meta is considered stale because there is only one style of play. Your only style of play is turbo. In a tournament where you need to win your games quickly, you need to play one of these decks. You ever hear players say the want to play "X" deck but can't because of time? This is because the basic rules of tournaments aren't friendly to any other styles of play. You can't play stall. You can't play disruption. You can't play anything you want because while you may win games, many of them will end in a draw simply because your deck isn't "tournament friendly" because it isn't fast enough. This has nothing to do with your skill but what deck you are playing. The biggest factor in the game is going first because you can play your hand. You get to do everything first and then maybe disrupt your opponent. Players are will to play Quad decks or other decks with low Basic counts because if you go first, you can removed any advantage of extra card draw from mulligans because of N, removing the drawback of the mechanic. Not to mention the player going first is at a even bigger advantage because we are getting a Support that attaches four energy from the deck.

I play Tempo but even I know this is risky to run because I will lose games/miss cut due to no fault of my own. In a healthy meta (I guess I should say diverse), we can see, Aggro/Turbo, Mill, Tempo, Healing, Disruption, Spread/Snipe and some other deck I'm forgetting. All we got now is Aggro/Turbo because the basic rules of the game are broken due to card design. If we had those deck archetypes in this meta with most being Tier 1 or Tier 2 decks, I would call it diverse, because you can play what you want and get results. I can play a Tempo deck and still win large events with little resistance from the rules.

The player going first also won't matter as much if the cards of the game were well balanced. Now, as a player going second, I have to wait what feels like 10 minutes before I get a turn because of how much card draw (and I mean any card that lets you see new cards) exist. My turns last maybe two minutes because of the kind of deck it is. If my opponent is playing a Lock deck and they go first, then I lose. The same thing is true for any other player and at this point, am left to top decking things in the correct order to maybe play what could be a game. The game rewards the player going first and the player who goes first is at a huge advantage.

As for the secondary market, what does this have to do with anything? You should never make a card game based on the secondary market. The players will decide what is worth playing, no matter what TPC makes but this means you have to make the cards as fair a possible. I would rather see small 60 card sets over the large 120+ card sets if it means we can get cards that feel like they have a purpose somewhere. I don't care if cards are worthless or have some value because this doesn't matter to the core of the game but since examples are needed, I'll give you some. Vespiquen was topping and winning every event during its time (as was Night march) but the cards never were more than 50 cents despite being highly demanded cards. VS Seeker, an uncommon is worth more that most ultra rare cards despite are prints that exist. Sometimes things make zero sense like Octillery going down from a 15 dollar card to a two dollar card because of its reprint in a Battle Arena deck but VS Seeker not going down much (I think it was at like nine bucks and dropped to five or six). We also have other staples like Ultra Ball, which every deck runs four of but is worth less than N, which is a three dollar card (all copies) and then we have things like Charizard, which aren't in any demand but hold a 35 dollar price tag for no reason. Even if most of the cards are good (I guess you mean balanced), then what makes them worthless? Players still want them and are willing to buy/trade for them. Even if the cards are worth 10 bucks at most because of this, I would call that a success because you as the card designers can do fun things like Hyper rare cards, which makes people want them more but doesn't affect the price on the secondary market.

It seems you're focusing on all the wrong things here. It honestly feels like you don't want an honest, skill-based game with your opponent and just want to steamroll them right out the gate and act like you had a good game. This is honestly the problem I have with most of the Pokemon players is they don't want to actually play the game. They just want to throw the deck at the opponent and hope they can't respond or disrupt them out the game and hope they can't respond. I don't like this trend at all.

 

[TheDude133]

I'm just going to reply to both of you in this instead of making a giant, quote covered comment.

My Theory on the secondary market wasn't approached in the right way, i'll admit that, but the point of it still exists. Pokemon doesn't randomly make cards, they know what they are making, and they know how it will affect he game. Now, While yes, cards like Vespiqueen break my "if its good, its not cheap" narrative, it also doesn't take into account pull rates. No one can deny that Vespiqueen is easier to pull than a shaymin. Again, my approach wasn't solid, and i admit there was some faults, so i'll take the L on that one.

When it comes to Tournament friendly decks, That has literally 0 to do with the cards, and everything to do with the tournament structure. You're basically saying that because tournaments have a time limit, the game is unhealthy. If you're going to time because of people playing slow, call a judge. This game doesn't have the mechanics or combos to make a turn take more than 2-4 minutes AT MOST, and I'm saying that knowing you are gonna shuffle your deck 2-3 times a turn most of the time. Slow play is community health, not game health.

Going first, in every card game, as an advantage to some degree. Its an inherent advantage. Think of it like Chess, White has an advantage because it goes first, regardless of player skill level. Now when you understand that going first always has an inherent advantage, you will understand that if both decks are dead even in progression of game state, then whoever went first will always win, solely because they won the coin toss. I've given examples of this with CFV. No amount of card balancing will get rid of this advantage. They already tried that by making it so you cant't attack first, like every other card game ever, but just like those games, it didn't get rid of the first turn buff.

As far as what meta i want. I want a skill based meta, but if you think, that this meta isn't skill based, then I don't know what to do for you. There's tech choices like Hex Maniac that you can play to counter Vileplume along with Wobuffet. Knowing that you can add techs to help the match-up is showing your skill as a player to identify the weakness of a deck. Tech choices exist. And aggro decks still take skill to play, in knowing where to put certain cards, when they can over-extend, knowing how to deal with disruption. You can say aggro decks don't take skill, but the fact of the matter is this. Pokemon is a simple game, it really doesn't take much skill to be good at the game, at least not as much as other card games, because this game lacks mechanics. It doesn't have timings, it doesn't have FTK's, it doesn't have player interaction. And that's what makes this game different from other TCG's, is that its's a lot more basic. There really isn't that much skill in this game, because there'e less to think about, and to be honest, less to punish for the wrong play.

It's funny that you attack Pokemon players, saying they just want to steamroll their opponents instead of playing the game. You basically say that because they have an aggressive play style, they don't want to play the game. When i played Yugioh, i love aggro decks, because it's my play style. Does that mean I hated slow decks? Not at all, in fact my favorite deck is a stun deck. It works the other way around as well. People with aggro play styles see disruption and stall decks as more of a solitaire style then aggro decks. Your deck is designed to say "You can't play Pokemon". Its called a preference, and just because the meta doesn't fit your preference, doesn't make it unhealthy. I still believe this meta is healthy, because we don't JUST have aggro decks at the top. We do also have disruption decks that are doing well. The game has gone from fast, to slow, to fast, to slow a million times, and the fact of the matter is, as long as you have a bias towards one style, a meta that doesn't favor you will always be "unhealthy" even though they both take the same amount of skill to play. Does that mean EVERY style of deck is in the meta, no, because the format is in a certain speed. as the speed changes, some styles will get better, some worse. Every card games goes through this cycle except the ones that have everything on an even playing field, because those games aren't decided by skill, but luck.

We can keep going back and forth with this, but to put it simply, the game just doesn't favor your play style at the moment, and that's ok, because it does favor other people's play style. Once cards that give two prizes go away, the game will be slower again, and that time will come, but for now, the EX's and GX's are here, and the game is aggressive. To me, it's healthy.

 

[crystal_pidgeot]

My Theory on the secondary market wasn't approached in the right way, i'll admit that, but the point of it still exists. Pokemon doesn't randomly make cards, they know what they are making, and they know how it will affect he game. Now, While yes, cards like Vespiqueen break my "if its good, its not cheap" narrative, it also doesn't take into account pull rates. No one can deny that Vespiqueen is easier to pull than a shaymin. Again, my approach wasn't solid, and i admit there was some faults, so i'll take the L on that one.

That's fair.

When it comes to Tournament friendly decks, That has literally 0 to do with the cards, and everything to do with the tournament structure. You're basically saying that because tournaments have a time limit, the game is unhealthy. If you're going to time because of people playing slow, call a judge. This game doesn't have the mechanics or combos to make a turn take more than 2-4 minutes AT MOST, and I'm saying that knowing you are gonna shuffle your deck 2-3 times a turn most of the time. Slow play is community health, not game health.

There are some decks you're not allowed to play in tournaments because of the 50+3 rule. It rewards players who play faster decks since you can maybe complete 3 games in 50 minutes. Now I feel I should say (because of understanding issues) that you can play slower deck, since no rule says you can't but you'll be at a huge disadvantage if you do, since if you don't win game one, you lose the round. No player wants to risk that so they don't play these decks. I have seen players shuffle their deck at least seven or eight times a turn, especially if they are drawing hot on the firs turn. Ultra Ball plus Prize checking, three or four Trainers' mail, three or four Max Elixir, another Ultra Ball and N creates a very lengthy turn, which I don't like sitting through. This is all uninterruptible with my common action being just cutting the deck. Sure Pokemon has always been this way with player interaction but it has never been like this.

This isn't a slow playing issue, it's a issue with the game's pace and how it interacts with the rules.

Going first, in every card game, as an advantage to some degree. Its an inherent advantage. Think of it like Chess, White has an advantage because it goes first, regardless of player skill level. Now when you understand that going first always has an inherent advantage, you will understand that if both decks are dead even in progression of game state, then whoever went first will always win, solely because they won the coin toss. I've given examples of this with CFV. No amount of card balancing will get rid of this advantage. They already tried that by making it so you cant't attack first, like every other card game ever, but just like those games, it didn't get rid of the first turn buff.

This is true so you try to balance this by not printing cards that can give huge advantage to the player going first and making a Supporter that give four Energy cards from the deck breaks this balance. Chess is different than a card game and you can't compare the two. The pieces in Chess are the same and will always do the same thing no matter the player. The first turn of Chess doesn't matter because you can only move one piece. The only thing that matters is skill. In card games, there are a ton of factors that decide whether or not you're going to have a good game and it is all out of your control. If you brick and your opponent got a monster start, you lose. This is why game pace is important because it turns the game from opening hands deciding the outcome to something more involved so if a player bricks, they have a few turns to draw out of it. Because this can't happen with the way the game is now, Evolution decks just aren't seen in the meta unless they are broken. I don't play CFV so I have no idea of the state of the game but it seems like you don't want to play a well balanced game. You seem to want expensive, broken cards that give the opponent no chance to play the game. You don't want a even match, you just want to win. Nothing wrong with that but don't blame the game because it doesn't let you steamroll players.

As far as what meta i want. I want a skill based meta, but if you think, that this meta isn't skill based, then I don't know what to do for you. There's tech choices like Hex Maniac that you can play to counter Vileplume along with Wobuffet. Knowing that you can add techs to help the match-up is showing your skill as a player to identify the weakness of a deck. Tech choices exist. And aggro decks still take skill to play, in knowing where to put certain cards, when they can over-extend, knowing how to deal with disruption. You can say aggro decks don't take skill, but the fact of the matter is this. Pokemon is a simple game, it really doesn't take much skill to be good at the game, at least not as much as other card games, because this game lacks mechanics. It doesn't have timings, it doesn't have FTK's, it doesn't have player interaction. And that's what makes this game different from other TCG's, is that its's a lot more basic. There really isn't that much skill in this game, because there'e less to think about, and to be honest, less to punish for the wrong play.

Skill is a very subjective term. The game now is just solitaire with a lot of over-dominate effects and Abilities. If my opponent plays Hex Maniac, what can I do about that? If my opponent goes first and gets a turn one Vileplume and I don't have my Hex Maniac, what can I do? Techs aren't skillful and wrecking your deck's consistency so you can maybe win a match you might not play against isn't skillful.

I also never liked it when people say it takes skill to play "X" card, because it doesn't. It doesn't take skill to play a Max Elixir or a Trainers' Mail. It doesn't take skill to play Energy cards or to play a Hoopa-EX. That isn't an argument. The skill comes from making the right choices and weighing whether or not it will make or break your game.

It's funny that you attack Pokemon players, saying they just want to steamroll their opponents instead of playing the game. You basically say that because they have an aggressive play style, they don't want to play the game. When i played Yugioh, i love aggro decks, because it's my play style. Does that mean I hated slow decks? Not at all, in fact my favorite deck is a stun deck. It works the other way around as well. People with aggro play styles see disruption and stall decks as more of a solitaire style then aggro decks. Your deck is designed to say "You can't play Pokemon". Its called a preference, and just because the meta doesn't fit your preference, doesn't make it unhealthy. I still believe this meta is healthy, because we don't JUST have aggro decks at the top. We do also have disruption decks that are doing well. The game has gone from fast, to slow, to fast, to slow a million times, and the fact of the matter is, as long as you have a bias towards one style, a meta that doesn't favor you will always be "unhealthy" even though they both take the same amount of skill to play. Does that mean EVERY style of deck is in the meta, no, because the format is in a certain speed. as the speed changes, some styles will get better, some worse. Every card games goes through this cycle except the ones that have everything on an even playing field, because those games aren't decided by skill, but luck.

I'm not attacking anyone, this is simple how it is. Most players don't want to actually play the game. They want games to be a one-sided as possible and hopefully in their favor. It doesn't matter the play style. Most people who play my Mega Pidgeot deck says it's the most one-sided thing they played against but that's because it's a well built deck that requires planning to work. Disruption and control decks can also steamroll opponents because of their nature. Also, what bias are you talking about? We want a different game from what we had since BW base and there is nothing wrong with that. Decks haven't changed in 5 years and play styles have remained the same. We say it's unhealthy because you can't play anything else and it become stale. if you want to say the game is diverse because there are different flavors of aggro, then we both use the term diverse differently.

We can keep going back and forth with this, but to put it simply, the game just doesn't favor your play style at the moment, and that's ok, because it does favor other people's play style. Once cards that give two prizes go away, the game will be slower again, and that time will come, but for now, the EX's and GX's are here, and the game is aggressive. To me, it's healthy.

I think you need to explain yourself a bit better because you aren't really supplying any data to backup your claim.[/QUOTE][/QUOTE]

 

[Dave Summers]

An ability you will only use once or twice a game, by then, all your supporters are in the discard and VS Seeker targets. It's good in very minuscule situations, otherwise its a walking Random Receiver. Its nothing more than a set up ability that has less utility over the entire coarse of the game than shaymin ex. Its attack is useless in meta where 2-3 energy attackers are running around with more than 200 hp, meaning it cant 2HKO anything. Yes Choice Band exists, but so does field blower. Not to mention that with its HP, its in OHKO range of a lot of attackers in the game right now. Weakness is useless in a meta where everything gets one-shot anyways, and as far as 1 retreat goes > Float Stone, Alter of the Moone, Escape Rope, Switch, Olympia. The card is good, but no broken. Mewtwo EX was insane back in the day because of its OHKO potential. The fact that we had cards like Blastiose and Eelectrik to flood Mewtwo with energy to OHKO Blastiose, Eels, or any basic pokemon attacker like Zekrom. Its the same reason Lugia EX isn't busted right now, because it's never going to OHKO anything. If you think that Lele is broken, then you have never played in a truly broken format like LuxChomp. Lele is a card that shouldn't be played at more than two, and even then, you only play it at two so you guarantee seeing it at least once even if one is prized. Lele isnt game changing. It didn't shape a meta around a single card. It's just another support pokemon that you only attack with when backed in a corner. You say its broken because its hyped, but when you actually look at the card, its no more broken than any other card in the game right now.

Edit: Mewtwo EX upon release killed the top three decks of its time. Primetime, The Truth, and Durant Mill, and completely reshaped the game. Tapu-Lele GX just makes good decks better.

Except that Lele wasn't created with the Standard mindset that we play today.

In SM-On, there is no VS Seeker. She is in OHKO range on a lot of attackers of SM-On, but there's also no Max Elixir or Colress Machine or any other ways to put energy on Item cards. The supporters on SM-On seem much more unforgiving on your opponent, without disruption like Hex or Lysandre, but as Latte1504 said up there: You get no direct punishment from playing Lele. 170 HP is a LOT to punish unlike Shaymin EX or Jirachi EX.

And yes, I was young on the DP-Pt days so I only played for the fun of it, but I do remember Pokémon Catcher and Mewtwo EX making me quit for some years.

Just to be clear: I wasn't planning on ganging up on you, so I also plan on stopping here. I'm just mad that I have to waste 150 bucks (this game is VERY expensive in Brazil, I'll make a topic to discuss this later) per Lele if I want to go competitive on the next format. I don't think a card without a single weakness is a healthy card. I know it's not the worst we've got but my point still stands.