Let's talk about Side Decks for Competitive Play

[vaporeon]

The only rules I have for this thread is to keep all discussion constructive and be open minded.

My opinion is that Pokemon (both TCG and VGC) have gotten completely out of hand. The Power Creep is ungodly and expecting players to have all tech options at all times is not realistic. I don't know any other way to describe it. Pokemon is the only game I know where people accept losses to matchups. Other card games that allow best of 3 give players to use side decks so they can sway these bad matchups. There is far too much to account for and have a response to. I'd much rather have a chance in a matchup if I know my side deck will allow me a way around safeguard or offer defense against lasers.

I was trying to build a deck in PTCGO and could not "fit" the core cards for the format into the deck. Using a deck that uses abilities and stage 2 Pokemon requires the use of certain cards just to function and if you don't run at least 3 (from my testing) Tool scrappers or megaphones, you lose to Garbodor. Almost nothing you can do about that if you 60 card deck has no room for it. If you do run it, you don't have a core card for your deck. Now a simple fix to this would be to allow players to use a 20 card side deck, without breaking the core rules of the game.

Side decks will allow players to not sacrifice consistency of their deck and allow players room to adapt (if their side deck supports it) to their opponents deck. Getting best of 3 was good but not a victory if they aren't going to do it right. It would make for much better tournaments if players could side in cards to beat different matchups and additional time. Sure they will be longer to allow these things but all competitive games allow some sort "counter play/pick" against their opponents for better chances to obtain a win.

I don't like this end all be all attitudes applied to Pokemon when the rules and basic concepts of competition are involved. Pokemon has way to much room to improve. With a extended format possible with all of BW being allowed with XY cards, the need for a side deck become stronger. Again this is just my opinion but its pretty much a given that tournaments are much better.

 

[tomoyosfan1]

I know I've seen this conversation before, and I would personally be strongly opposed to side decks in Pokémon, especially the way you are suggesting they be done. Here is why: Let's say I'm playing Darkrai/Yveltal (extremely consistency-based, no techs except for Keldeo)

Here's a 20 card side deck:
2 Trubbish
2 Garbodor
3 Enhanced Hammer
4 Float Stone
2 Raichu
2 Pikachu
2 Sableye
2 Druddigon
1 Silver Mirror

Now, I can completely change my deck to counter whatever you plan to play. Want to use abilities? I have Garbodor as a major part of my deck. Am I playing a mirror? Raichu can OHKo any Yveltal. Playing Blastoise or Rayboar? Garbodor and Druddigon will completely destroy any chance you have of winning. Playing Plasma? I can now have 3 Sableye (assume 1 is in the deck already) and 3 Enhanced Hammer, so there is no chance you will ever get to keep energy down.

I understand why you think side decks would be a good idea, but in Pokemon the idea just wouldn't work well. You wouldn't see fun new ideas coming out with this rule; you'd see decks like I described above that are able to completely change their focus with changing 10 cards or less.

 

[vaporeon]

A side deck like that is not the end all be all because I would side 4 mega phone, perhaps basic energy for E. Hammer etc. A good player will know his bad matchups and prepare for them. Darkrai/dark decks are broken to begin with and that cant be help. For one a Darkrai/Yveltal player could just side out Yveltal if he fears Raichu. We can't let 1 deck be the deciding factor whether or not a side decks are used or not because a lot of decks cold use them. We also cant say we wont see anything fun or not because the game has not been interesting or fun since the end of HGSS.

The main point for side decks are to give you better matchups, whether or not it changes the deck. Druddigon, in yugioh or magic would be a prime example of a side deck card as its would not be good enough for main deck space. The side deck you listed is also not very consistant to stop threats. You would need more Garbodor and tools. Its not really all that easy to lockdown a deck. It will work with Pokemon for the same reasons it works in other card games.

 

[FirestormXVI]

Video Game has a side board already.

TCG side board would destroy the viability of many decks completely. Make better decisions with your deck. This isn't Magic. Pokemon's gameplay is completely different.

 

[vaporeon]

Video Game has a side board already.

TCG side board would destroy the viability of many decks completely. Make better decisions with your deck. This isn't Magic. Pokemon's gameplay is completely different.

Why is pokemon different? When you say viability of decks, do you just mean taking pyroar to a tournament and win because your opponents did not have room for techs? We have best of 3 now, why not do it right. Pokemon is a setup game just like the other big card games. I make good deck decisions but, space is and always has been a issue. A 15 to 20 card side deck allows player good tech choices and better deck consistency.

I want to know why you think this wont work for Pokemon. Any testing results or something?

 

[raxl]

Why is pokemon different? When you say viability of decks, do you just mean taking pyroar to a tournament and win because your opponents did not have room for techs? We have best of 3 now, why not do it right. Pokemon is a setup game just like the other big card games. I make good deck decisions but, space is and always has been a issue. A 15 to 20 card side deck allows player good tech choices and better deck consistency.

I want to know why you think this wont work for Pokemon. Any testing results or something?

I'm in favor of having tournaments that test the idea of a sideboard in Pokemon, and I might even do some at my league over the summer. That said, there are a few reasons I'm not sure it will work out.

First, the cards aren't designed with sideboarding in mind. The folks who put together card designs, test card interactions, and decide what goes into sets and at what power levels don't, to the best of our knoweldge, test with sideboards. So there may be cards that, in a sideboarding environment, would be "broken" that aren't right now. (The flipside of this is that some cards we consider "bad" might be playable if you could bring them in for games two and three of a specific matchup.)

Second, the number of cards in your deck you'd want to change is smaller than it is in Magic (I don't know about other card games); this is basically tomoyosfan1's argument. In Pokemon, pretty much all decks right now run 10-15 energy (some of which are specific to the deck, some of which are not), 12-15 draw supporters, and 5ish Pokemon search cards (ultra ball, heavy ball, level ball). That's almost half your deck that you wouldn't want to sideboard at all in most situations. That lets you, with 15-20 cards in a sideboard, basically change which deck you're playing in the middle of a round. That's an _interesting_ challenge, but I don't think it's where most people would like the game to go. I'm in favor of testing a 6-8 card sideboard, which wouldn't allow for deck transformations but would let toolbox decks play a wider toolbox and consistent decks bring some hard counters, but even that could prove to be a lot.

Third, a number of sanctioned events are best of 1 (league challenges) and a decent number are best of 1 until top cut, which is best of three (many cities, some states at Juniors level). How do you handle deckbuilding where you have a sideboard for some but not all rounds in a tournament? Some but not all tournaments in a day? It's not impossible but it's not consistet which seems like it would be challenging for players, judges, and staff. The best of 1 swiss best of 3 top cut seems particularly challenging, in that the best 60 cards for swiss and the best 60 cards for top cut are explicitly different. Again, maybe that's an interesting challenge, but it's not one I'm personally excited about seeing introduced to the game. (And best of 3 for league challenges and all cities doesn't seem viable across the board at this time.)

Fourth, while I realize this is of a piece with other complaints a lot of folks have, do we really want to add sideboarding time to bo3 matches that already end in draws more often than many players would like? Magic is able to do bo3+sideboarding in 50 minutes and only rarely have draws because it's a faster game where fewer cards are drawn and games resolve more quickly. I do think there's some truth to the argument that Pokemon players should play more quickly, but even then, Pokemon games take longer both because of the number and types of decisions that have to be made and because of all the shuffling. Adding in more time between games makes me uncomfortable.

Fifth, many Pokemon players aren't experienced with sideboarding as a concept, and I think the learning process would lead to some awkward judge calls. I don't get warm fuzzies imagining giving game losses to juniors for accidentally leaving a sideboard card in their deck and presenting 61 cards to their opponent at the start of the game, or playing that sideboard card and saying "wait, that's not maindeck..." I don't think this is insurmountable (and I think it's less of a problem the higher-level the event) but I don't think the adjustment period would be fun. (Magic even changed its sideboarding rules recently to mitigate some effects like this, so "adults" who play "seriously" aren't immune to these kinds of mistakes either; I remember seeing someone get a game loss for having a board card in their deck game one at the Pro Tour...)

None of these are impossible to overcome, and none of them mean some kind of sidebord isn't worth trying in Pokemon. But I don't think it's safe to assume that it will and should work in Pokemon just because it works for other card games. Those other card games are designed for sideboards, have communities familiar with sideboards, and also are mechanically different in terms of deckbuilding and gameplay. If I do have enough players interested in some small unsanctioned tournaments with sideboards, I'll report back about how we think it went. Has anyone else tried?

 

[vaporeon]

I agree with those points. I've been thinking about some them and wondering why people are so opposed to the idea. The common thing seems to be is the whole deck changing and I just dont see it. In high level of play, you wont see a darkrai deck become blastoise. If they want to chance their deck, then fine, let them. Most thing to worry about it darkrai siding in Garbodor. The only common side deck cards I could see most using is Pyroar, Safeguard and Garbodor.

The one thing you did bring up was the cards weren't design for side decks and I would have to agree to a point. Some decks add techs for matchups because they help for it. That means that card would be good in a side deck. Things like Tool Scrapper, Pyroar, the new Druddigon. Techs will still exist but there wont be a need to over tech. Perhaps 20 cards is a bit of overkill. I was thinking more of 12 to 15 to allow tech for your deck.

The side deck would only be used for events using best of 3 and or top cut. For this to really work though, the time limit would need to be increased to at least 75 minutes to all full games and enough time for side decking.

Im will to try out a small event with it. I rather have some evidence to show if it works or not rather then people saying "do not want" without anything backing up that claim.

*Edit*

To add to this, I also wanted to test a Ban/Restriction list with this this idea. Could make for fun non official tournaments that could draw in those hardcore yugioh and magic players who demand a bit more.

 

[tomoyosfan1]

I agree with those points. I've been thinking about some them and wondering why people are so opposed to the idea. The common thing seems to be is the whole deck changing and I just dont see it. In high level of play, you wont see a darkrai deck become blastoise. If they want to chance their deck, then fine, let them. Most thing to worry about it darkrai siding in Garbodor. The only common side deck cards I could see most using is Pyroar, Safeguard and Garbodor.

The one thing you did bring up was the cards weren't design for side decks and I would have to agree to a point. Some decks add techs for matchups because they help for it. That means that card would be good in a side deck. Things like Tool Scrapper, Pyroar, the new Druddigon. Techs will still exist but there wont be a need to over tech. Perhaps 20 cards is a bit of overkill. I was thinking more of 12 to 15 to allow tech for your deck.

The side deck would only be used for events using best of 3 and or top cut. For this to really work though, the time limit would need to be increased to at least 75 minutes to all full games and enough time for side decking.

Im will to try out a small event with it. I rather have some evidence to show if it works or not rather then people saying "do not want" without anything backing up that claim.

The problem with using sideboards as you suggest also brings a time problem. The time limits we have seem to be about at their maximum for Pokémon, so if we were to increase time limits on the bigger events (so we could do 75 minutes for a sideboard), it looks like we'll have to cut down the number of rounds for that tournament. Logic would dictate that every third round would need to get cut (3 50 min rounds= 150 mins; 2 75 min rounds = 150 mins). Here's a question for you: Assuming we're going to have a 6-round tournament under our current system, would you really like to see it become a 4-round tournament with sideboards? To me, personally, I'd rather not see the larger tournaments have less rounds, just so we could have a sideboard issue.

I also could see some cards actually going up in price if a sideboard was introduced, which would be another hurdle, especially for newer players. Many cards don't go as high as they could, since they typically get played, at most, as 1 or 2 copies in a deck. With sideboards, more players might play 4 between their main and side deck, which causes there to be more demand and a higher price because of it. I can guarantee you that would actually start decreasing tournament attendance across the board, because more players (especially the newer ones) will have a harder time getting those cards and be less likely to do tournaments).

Even 12-15 cards is way more than necessary. While I personally don't like the idea, using any more than 5 cards in a side deck would be a major problem. When you look at Yu-gi-oh (which is the only game I personally have any experience with that used side decks), there isn't very much draw/search in it. That means those 15 cards are important since it's harder to draw into them. In Pokemon, we have a massive amount of search to the point that a 1 or 2 card tech can be incredibly important (especially with Dowsing Machine or using Super Rod and then Ultra Ball to reuse it depending on if it's a trainer or Pokémon).

Finally even your reasoning for the sideboards won't help. Even with sideboards (even with 15-20 cards) we will still have autolosses. Like playing Accelgor/Trevanant? Too bad, you will still autolose to Virizion/Slurpuff, and it may be even harder since more decks will sideboard those cards if they aren't main-decked. So while sideboards help some decks, some deck still have to face autolosses; that hardly seems fair when that was the entire reason for using side boards in the first place.

 

[Mekkah]

Tech cards in Pokémon are too powerful for the game to remain healthy with a sideboard. The following current archetypes would become infinitely worse if you were to introduce even a small sideboard.

Blastoise: Everyone techs 1-2 Druddigon, suddenly every deck only needs to be able to deal with Keldeo EX.
Emboar: Same story except Emboar's alternative attacker is Delphox.
Accelgor: Virizion + 4 Rainbow Energy, deck can no longer function.
Garbodor: Generally decks already have room for 2 Scrapper/Megaphone. They can add 2 more to their sideboard if they want to.

Decks that rely on spread damage will find Mr. Mime around every corner. Decks that rely on Special Energy will get Enhanced Hammered.

Just because every deck gains more space doesn't mean the more complicated decks that you want to work so badly will suddenly work. It has the added side effect of giving the decks that can already make do with 60 cards even more luxury slots to work with. It will make deck building for everyone easier, not harder, since there's less difficult decisions to make.

 

[vaporeon]

You bring up a good point with the draw and search power of yugioh vs pokemon but yugioh has changed into archetype vs archetype where they have built in draw and search power. I played someone who went through 20 cards on their first turn leading ending in a card that said I could not do anything. That is quite common in yugioh now. However I have side deck options to defend myself with. I dont play yugioh often anymore so I dont know the popular tech options. The problem with yugioh is over dominate and aggressive strategies. However in Pokemon, taking a auto loss seems to be acceptable part of the game but not to me so I try to over tech, which leads to bad matchup and bad draws for a matchup I may never play.

On the next thing, we cant allow a secondary market to dictate whether or not to try or introduce something new. New player or not, it was hard to get a Mewtwo EX when t was released because of the 70 buck price tag. Same with Darkrai and SR Rayquaza. There will always be that cash barrier when it comes to anything popular but perhaps some of those Pokemon would like to be a bit more pricy. Im sure they each want a niche somewhere. So we cant let card price be a deciding factor with this.

In Pokemon, I dont like over dominate strategies. Anything that locks for "free" and is easy to get into play should have easy breaks. Again, this is a problem with card interactions with the BW sets and may be less of a problem with XY. Lock Strategies should be harder to get because of how powerful they are when used. A Accelgor/Trevanant lock is broken, no matter how you look at it and becomes even more broken when you can control damage with Dusknoir. If siding in Virizion/Slurpuff means a player can kill off one strategy of their opponents deck, then I say the side deck did its job. The trainer lock will be harder to break without but you can deal with the status part.

I do agree some decks get stronger, like Darkrai, as it can run ultra consistent but because of the side deck, things like Emolga EX, who is a fast attack can keep aggressive Yveltals at bay. Terrakion keeps Darkrai at bay as well. We may even see things like Ho-Oh EX and energy switch again. Mewtwo EX may be given life again while making thing like Leafeon good tech option. This also assumes the player will make smart choices with their side deck.

At the end of the day, time will be the biggest factor so perhaps we should run a series of fan made tournaments with these rules and see if TPC/i takes notice if it works well. I personally think in can work but side decks work very well with ban list, which is something I want to test as well with it.

 

[Mystery Thing]

My biggest resistance to the entire idea is purely from the inevitable penalties side of things. From miscounting cards post-game and having too large of a deck to forgetting outright to change a deck back and starting the next round with the completely "wrong" deck, there would inevitably be an enormous influx of deck-related penalties, many of which would probably result in Game Losses.

Side question to that one: does any game that allow sideboarding also have an exact required number of cards in the deck? MTG and YGO are both "a minimum of X cards," correct?

 

[ExoByte]

MTG is "exactly 15" in the sideboard, and every swap must be 1-for-1 (in constructed).

 

[signofzeta]

MTG is "exactly 15" in the sideboard, and every swap must be 1-for-1 (in constructed).

WOTC changed it to up to 15 ever since M14 was released.

Even if Pokemon had sideboards, it has to be 1 for 1 considering how you must have 60 and only 60 cards in your deck.

Im will to try out a small event with it. I rather have some evidence to show if it works or not rather then people saying "do not want" without anything backing up that claim.

That's sort of the thing that separates the MTG community and the Pokemon TCG community. From my observations, the MTG community are open to new game types, and formats, even if they weren't used for competition, but Pokemon TCG community is always "we play it this way or the highway", or "the game isn't designed to be played a different way".

To be honest, I don't know if it is the community or if it is the design of the TCG that causes the game to only be played a limited number of ways, but I am guessing it is the community more than game design. Look at MTG. MTG was probably designed a certain way, but people made up new rules and made new game types for MTG.

Comparing other TCG's with Pokemon TCG,

Most other TCG's support drafting. Pokemon does, but it isn't that much supported.

Most other TCG's have free for all. Pokemon doesn't.

Most other TCG's can play team battle. Pokemon does, but nobody ever plays it, or never heard of it.

I think it is this negativity or this nay-saying that is causing this game to only have one way of playing it.

Sideboards? Doesn't work.

Free for all? Doesn't work.

A game mode that mimics 3 vs 3 or rotation battles in the game? Doesn't work.

A self running deck that aren't really Pokemon cards based on the villainous teams in the game? Doesn't work.

When I say Pokemon TCG community, I only have enough info from the Gym and the Beach. Other Pokemon TCG communities may be more open to new formats, or trying to play the game a different way.

 

[vaporeon]

Yugioh i also 15 cards as well. The reason I opt for a large side deck is to give players enough tech/counter options. Like others said, swaps are 1 for 1 so your deck needs to be 60 at all time. If needed, players can count the side deck to make sure its exactly 15.

 

[Mystery Thing]

I just wasn't sure if in other games you could theoretically increase your deck size from (for example) 61 to 64 through sideboarding.

Obviously for Pokémon it would have to be 1 for 1, but that doesn't mean you wouldn't see Juniors/Seniors (or heck, Masters too) missing a card here or there while resetting their decks. Considering how many people seem to be unable to write a down a list that adds up to 60, I think it's a given they would also be missing swapping in and out cards properly now and then. And if the answer is that you just count sideboards before the game, what happens if you find out there's a problem? Is there a penalty for the delay that it'll cause? Do you track down the decklist to make sure that the missing card is the correct missing card?

I don't know how widespread/if it happens at all in other games, but I would also be waiting for somebody in inevitably intentionally start their deck with sideboarded cards for the last swiss round or two when everybody at the top tables know what each other are playing. If you know going in your opponent is playing mainly Yveltal EX, why wouldn't you start your deck out with a sideboarded Raichu line? It just seems to me to be a virtually impossible thing to catch, since you can't be deck checking every deck before every round to make sure they were reset correctly. Granted, I was never that good at MTG, and I haven't played YGO in probably close to a decade now, but it seems to me that Pokémon is more prone to hard counters where you could get a pretty serious advantage by attempting something like that.

 

[raxl]

I just wasn't sure if in other games you could theoretically increase your deck size from (for example) 61 to 64 through sideboarding.

The rules changed last year; you now _can_ increase your deck size from, say, 61 to 64 through sideboarding. I doubt Pokemon would do the same thing, though, because Pokemon search is so much more powerful.

Obviously for Pokémon it would have to be 1 for 1, but that doesn't mean you wouldn't see Juniors/Seniors (or heck, Masters too) missing a card here or there while resetting their decks. Considering how many people seem to be unable to write a down a list that adds up to 60, I think it's a given they would also be missing swapping in and out cards properly now and then. And if the answer is that you just count sideboards before the game, what happens if you find out there's a problem? Is there a penalty for the delay that it'll cause? Do you track down the decklist to make sure that the missing card is the correct missing card?

I don't know how widespread/if it happens at all in other games, but I would also be waiting for somebody in inevitably intentionally start their deck with sideboarded cards for the last swiss round or two when everybody at the top tables know what each other are playing. If you know going in your opponent is playing mainly Yveltal EX, why wouldn't you start your deck out with a sideboarded Raichu line? It just seems to me to be a virtually impossible thing to catch, since you can't be deck checking every deck before every round to make sure they were reset correctly. Granted, I was never that good at MTG, and I haven't played YGO in probably close to a decade now, but it seems to me that Pokémon is more prone to hard counters where you could get a pretty serious advantage by attempting something like that.

These issues do happen in other games. If Pokemon were to consider this seriously, I suspect they'd go and talk to folks who handled these judging/process issues in other games and see how it works for them. I should ask the Magic judges at my store before I try to run an unsanctioned event, come to think of it. While the games and the players aren't the same, it's at least something to start from.

(Another thing to watch out for: Uneven sleeve wear between mainboard and sideboard. On Magic decks I play frequently, I'll rotate cards and sleeves so that the sideboard sleeves don't end up a slightly different color.)

 

[vaporeon]

There may be issues with it in the younger age groups. The age groups in yugioh and magic are more competitive than the Pokemon age groups but they dont have issues with side decks all too much. In all my time playing those games, I never saw something come up where players decks were plus or minus cards because of side deck... in fact, the only issue I saw in yugioh involved the extra deck where they forgot to place the cards back.

Some things will be hard to check but we have to hope players maintain the integrity we ask of players. Player who want to cheat will cheat. its also uncommon to do random deck list checks and as players become more experienced, they may be able to detect fowl play and report it.

 

[TRAINER HEZ]

That's sort of the thing that separates the MTG community and the Pokemon TCG community. From my observations, the MTG community are open to new game types, and formats, even if they weren't used for competition, but Pokemon TCG community is always "we play it this way or the highway", or "the game isn't designed to be played a different way".

When I say Pokemon TCG community, I only have enough info from the Gym and the Beach. Other Pokemon TCG communities may be more open to new formats, or trying to play the game a different way.

Yeah I know what you mean. SixPrizes seems to be a little more open to alternate ideas and formats but still as a whole you can see the attitude in the way people talk about older sets. There's not just "Standard and Unlimited" cards, there's "legal and rotated" cards. Helping promote the Unlimited 150 format (Pokemon Commander/EDH essentially) has shown me what an uphill struggle it is to present new ideas in Pokemon.

More on topic; I can see the pros and cons of sideboards in Standard right now. Pro is you can run more experimental builds in your main without having to fill it with techs and counters. On the con side however, the hate you could side in could be overwhelming. They've printed some quite obscene hate cards since B&W that hose entire archetypes. Like someone above said, you could just make an uber consistent speed Darkness deck without the awkward Trubbish starts and then side in the Ability lock line in match-ups where it counts.

- - - Updated - - -

That's sort of the thing that separates the MTG community and the Pokemon TCG community. From my observations, the MTG community are open to new game types, and formats, even if they weren't used for competition, but Pokemon TCG community is always "we play it this way or the highway", or "the game isn't designed to be played a different way".

When I say Pokemon TCG community, I only have enough info from the Gym and the Beach. Other Pokemon TCG communities may be more open to new formats, or trying to play the game a different way.

Yeah I know what you mean. SixPrizes seems to be a little more open to alternate ideas and formats but still as a whole you can see the attitude in the way people talk about older sets. There's not just "Standard and Unlimited" cards, there's "legal and rotated" cards. Helping promote the Unlimited 150 format (Pokemon Commander/EDH essentially) has shown me what an uphill struggle it is to present new ideas in Pokemon.

More on topic; I can see the pros and cons of sideboards in Standard right now. Pro is you can run more experimental builds in your main without having to fill it with techs and counters. On the con side however, the hate you could side in could be overwhelming. They've printed some quite obscene hate cards since B&W that hose entire archetypes. Like someone above said, you could just make an uber consistent speed Darkness deck without the awkward Trubbish starts and then side in the Ability lock line in match-ups where it counts.

 

[signofzeta]

A little off topic, but I wonder why the Pokemon TCG never had some sort of dungeon deck, where they aren't really Pokemon cards, but a deck that represents a locale in the Pokemon world.

The trick is that you and your buddies are supposed to work together as a team to beat through this dungeon. Just think about the Beat the Hydra, Battle the Horde, and Defeat a God decks in MTG. This idea is so going to waste with the Pokemon TCG, considering the attitude of the community.

If Pokegym is the place where we have an actual TPCi representative posting in the forums, and the community here is more conservative, I am afraid that TPCi will least likely to try new things out with Pokemon TCG, like new game types, new formats, and even fun multiplayer formats.

- - - Updated - - -

A little off topic, but I wonder why the Pokemon TCG never had some sort of dungeon deck, where they aren't really Pokemon cards, but a deck that represents a locale in the Pokemon world.

The trick is that you and your buddies are supposed to work together as a team to beat through this dungeon. Just think about the Beat the Hydra, Battle the Horde, and Defeat a God decks in MTG. This idea is so going to waste with the Pokemon TCG, considering the attitude of the community.

If Pokegym is the place where we have an actual TPCi representative posting in the forums, and the community here is more conservative, I am afraid that TPCi will least likely to try new things out with Pokemon TCG, like new game types, new formats, and even fun multiplayer formats.

 

[vaporeon]

@ TRAINER HEZ

That is mostly why I want to test with a ban/restriction list as well. The goal is to allow players proper counter options when playing best of 3. You can also be sure Darkrai would be hit by the list pretty hard.