Pokémon TCG: Sword and Shield—Brilliant Stars

SW Muk broken?

I do recall prerelease players going "Wow... Muk's actually not that bad...!", and this is in a format without Multi Energy or Double Rainbow. Grimer's not bad either, with Gunky (yay, smokescreen for 1 energy, even IF it doesn't damage).

...Of course, the retreat cost is bad. The weakness is going to become bad VERY quickly. AGAIN. (Man, when has Psychic weakness not been horrible, other then the HP->MT format?). Not to mention the required 3 energy in order to attack. AND HP is horrid. Broken might be a bit of a stretch. Of course, it's not half bad for something that at first glance doesn't look that good at all.

I do wonder if it'd make a good Crobat friend. You have this attacking and locking them active, Crobat can up the poison when needed, and snipe should it have to. Of course, how do you set up things quickly? Especially the energy cost? Hm... Questions indeed...

HP though is DEFINATELY the most pressing Issue. HP. 80 HP. 80. Oh dear. One shotable by a lot... Why isn't it's HP like, 100 or something? That'd balance this thing out quite nicely, actually :/
 
DRE was in CG

Multi was in DP/HP

They are still legal.

And so is Warp point, switch, ssu, etc. etc.
 
moza said:
DRE was in CG

Multi was in DP/HP

They are still legal.
Click to expand...

...I was referring to people mentioning this during the prerelease.

Limited Format (SW) wouldn't have DRE.
 
Eh...

Here are a few problems:

1. Lati-lock. If this, or any other body deck (amphy... kabutops) gets popular this instantly solves the problem.
2. You'll run into decks that simply won't lay down their DRE or scrambles until needed and kill you. This isn't that great vs blissey or lucario, etc. Even if they ARE poisoned because this was a 1/1 tech line. Remember it's a stage 1 that is shut off with cessation, that has to take a bench spot up and needs to be set up itself to get going. Even then it's such a situational tech that it's hard to get it. How many decks can afford a 1/1 line to possibly poison the opponent some of the time? Few to none.
3. MUK isn't even that good in itself. No resistance. PPC attack? Hard to power up. Auto-confuse and retreat lock is cool, but when people are playing 2-3 warp point in a deck they'll be able to get around that.
4. 80hp on a stage 1 is okay, but NOT as a main attacker.

As a rule of thumb, a pokemon generally has to get over the even slump, and into the odd slump. These slumps are the hp slumps.

40hp
60hp
80hp
100hp

All weak. You look at lucario with 90hp, blissey with 130, etc. 80 is just a bad number. If it was 90? That might be doable. It's always been the case that getting over that 10hp hump is HUGE for pokemon in the active spot. Medicham ex had 110hp. Mew had the 90 over the 80, or else we'd see less of that card played. Banette had 90.

You get the picture. It's important for active spot pokemon or starter pokemon to have those odd hps. Having a 40hp starter is abyssmal when you can have a 50hp starter.

Is muk broken? Nah.
 
rhodesia123 said:
its worse to have 100 hp than 90 hp
Click to expand...

Pardon? More HP is bad?

Perhaps you meant to say 100 HP isn't that much of a difference over 90 HP, which when it comes to OHKOs is... still not true. Nidoqueen one shots 90 HP pokemon. Several pokemon can do 80 damage, which + 1 pluspower is 90. It'd take 2 pluspowers to OHKO an 100 HP pokemon.

Seems like a rather bizarre statement to make :/

Muk really does just feel like a Toxicroak friend though (can't retreat, can't evolve to get rid of Poison, you're stuck). It's just too low HP to last against T2 decks OR Set up decks, and it doesn't deal the kind of damage required of a T2 deck (or at least weaken the attack and give it less energy cost) :/
 
rhodesia123 said:
its worse to have 100 hp than 90 hp
Click to expand...

Absolutely. For anyone who sees this reasoning as enigmatic...:

Predicate 1: Pokémon with higher HP will be weaker in other areas to compensate compared for their lower HPed cousins in general. Having 10 extra HP than an odd HP will not be more helpful than the reduced capabilities are a hinderance.
Predicate 2: It is desirable for the helpful attributes to outweigh the hinderances.
Conclusion: 90 HP > 100 HP.

Back to back posts merged. The following information has been added:

Rai said:
Pardon? More HP is bad?

Perhaps you meant to say 100 HP isn't that much of a difference over 90 HP
Click to expand...

No, I think he meant 100 IS less desirable,
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top