2-3 Claydol: Why does it make sense?

Discussion in 'Cards: Strategy and Rulings Discussion' started by yoyofsho16, Jul 31, 2008.

  1. yoyofsho16

    yoyofsho16 New Member

    As long as I can remember since Claydol GE has become popular as draw support in decks, people have always been teching it in as a 2-2 line, being 2 Baltoy, and 2 Claydol.

    In the past few days, however, I have seen in some threads that people are starting to use 2-3 Claydol, meaning that there is one more Claydol in the deck then there is Baltoy.

    I was immediately baffled the first time I saw it, and had to ask someone why.
    They responded, saying that it made the Claydol more consistent and easier to get, and it lowers the chances of getting a Baltoy start. However, this doesn't make sense to me for a couple of reasons:

    1. It doesn't really prevent Baltoy starts: Whether or not you have a third Claydol or not, the chances of getting a Baltoy as your only basic Pokemon still remain the same. The number of Claydols doesn't change how many Basic Pokemon you have in your deck at all, so the chances of Baltoy being in your opening hand are the same.

    2. Dead cards: That third Claydol is a dead card. You could only possibly have 2 Claydol on the field at the same time, so that Claydol still lingers around somewhere, as a dead card. I believe that the best way to build a deck is so that at any given time, no matter what card you draw, that card can benefit you in some way. Sequentially, drawing a card that could not serve you any purpose in any way would b dangerous, as that wastes one more card you could have drawn, and it fills up your hand with a card you can't use.

    3. Prize issue: Sure, 2-3 Claydol's effectiveness could be argued with the fact that it is less likely that a vital Claydol would be prized, but that doesn't make sense either. The odds of getting a Baltoy prized are pretty much the same, so it doesn't make much of a difference. If that Baltoy IS prized, then you are worse off then if a Baltoy was prized in 2-2 Claydol, as now you have 2 dead cards, not just 1.

    Could somebody explain to me exactly what the benefits of 2-3 Claydol are?

    Discuss.
     
    Last edited: Jul 31, 2008
  2. Ignatious

    Ignatious New Member

    Because people NEED to fetch Claydol no matter what, every game. that third Claydol helps your odds of getting him on turn 2. 3 Baltoy is useless as it increases Baltoy starts and it's much easier to get Baltoy into play via Roseannes, Call, Mentor, and other cards you may use that fish out basics.
     
  3. GKOTM

    GKOTM Member

    Would you rather use 3 Baltoy? I think the Baltoy start thing comes from running only two Baltoys versus the three you'd be running if you ran a 3-3 line.

    I also think that some people want that turn 2 Claydol as often as possible, so they'd be running 3 of them with 4 Bebe's/Celio's + 4 Roseanne's or whatever.
     
  4. yoyofsho16

    yoyofsho16 New Member

    Yes, but you can't get that Claydol out without having the Baltoy! What use is raising the odds of getting the Claydol if those odds are higher then getting a Baltoy? I would much rather have 3 Baltoy, so I can at least bench it and wait for the Claydol then have a dead card in my hand.
     
  5. Whicker

    Whicker New Member

    Early Claydols are ESSENTIAL for most decks to function. That's an easy concept to understand. 2-3 line of Claydol increases your chance of getting that early Claydol. Basics are extremely easy to search out, as Roseanne's is nearly a staple (AND gets multiple basics) and Bebe's and Luxury Ball can also pull basics. Evolutions, however, are harder to search from the deck because the cards used to pull them are only able to fetch one evolution and there are overall fewer cards in the deck that can get them. Because of this, drawing into your evolutions helps a ton because then you can use your Bebe's Search to pull other ones that are essential for the power. 3 Claydol gives you this better chance to draw into an actual Claydol.

    Dead cards are generally not an issue once you have Claydol out because you can just cycle them to the bottom.

    The argument for a decreased Baltoy start is to show why 2-3 is better than 3-3, not 2-2.
     
  6. yoyofsho16

    yoyofsho16 New Member

    But let's say you have 3 cards in your hand, one of them being that extra Claydol.
    You can only put 2 cards at the bottom, the Claydol and something else, leaving 1 card in your hand. Therefore, you draw 5 cards when you could have drawn 6. If the Claydol was absent in your deck, it could have been something you can play, like Roseannes or something, and you would have drawn into the full 6 cards.
     
  7. Whicker

    Whicker New Member

    Alright, you can make that argument... But let's say instead of the third Claydol you play... a Pluspower, or something. You get your standard turn 2 (Roseanne's or last turn's Call Energy) so you have a Baltoy out. You draw... the Pluspower! It could have been the Claydol! The following two turns you sit there with no evolutions or anything, as your opponent Rare Candy's into their Kingdra and proceeds to beat you. You look at the top cards of your deck to reveal your Rare Candy and your main attacker, meaning that if you have had that third Claydol you could have drawn it and saved yourself.

    Both of these (yours and mine) are extreme situations, obviously. My point was that you can't look at only one-side (the bad side) and win this debate.
     
  8. Pablo

    Pablo New Member

    It's called probability, simple mths shows 2-3 improves significantly your chances of this. Usually decks have more focus on getting Basics out faster than other Pokemon, so with 4 Call Energy and 4 Roseanne, you are fine with just 2 Baltoy, but then 4 Bebe's + 3 Claydol raise your odds of having Claydol earlier than if you had 4 Bebe's + 2 Claydol. Simple maths really.
     
  9. Ignatious

    Ignatious New Member

    There are more cards that search for Baltoy then there are for Claydol, so getting Baltoy out is usually never a problem.
     
  10. PokePockets

    PokePockets New Member

    i haven't heard much of the 2-3 Claydol, but it is not a bad idea. It allows for an earlier Claydol, and you have an additional Claydol incase 1 gets prized.

    Pablo spelled it out, it's all about Probability
     
  11. PokePop

    PokePop Administrator

    Most decks have 8 search cards to get the Baltoy but only 4 to get the Claydol.
    So it makes sense to increase their number to help the chance of getting them out.
     
  12. WinkWinkNudgeNudge

    WinkWinkNudgeNudge New Member

    I imagine that the additional Claydol would help with Quick Balls, Dusk Balls and Azelf (LA) to snag a quick Claydol. While the extra Claydol is dead card the same decks have jetisoned their Pachis (more dead cards) for calls freeing up some space.

    On the Baltoy issue. I was considering switching to one once Azelf is available.
     
  13. Professor Elm

    Professor Elm Active Member

    It's not so much that it decreases Baltoy starts.
    The reason is there are MANY ways to search out basics in a deck. With most decks playing 4 Call Energy, 4 Roseannes, and 1-2 Pachi you can easily have Baltoy sitting on your bench turn 1.

    Now, let's look at ways to search out Claydol.
    Well, 4 Bebes/Celios obviously, and then you just have 2 Claydols.

    SO, that's only 6 cards. Although your chances of starting with one of those are decent, it's still unlikely that you will consistently pull T2 Claydol. And, TRUST ME, Plox's speed RELIES on T2 Claydol. And dead cards just become Claydol bait, and they really do not impact you as much.

    It's all about consistency. The more Claydols the better.

    I am a HUGE consistency freak. So, playing a 3-4 Claydol line with 4 Bebes and 1 Celios is just natural. 9 ways to get out Claydol T2. Now, THAT'S consistent. Baltoy's are easy to get also. Although I understand that 4 Claydols really does seem excessive to most people, I honestly can say that my Plox build is one of the most consistent created.
     
  14. yoyofsho16

    yoyofsho16 New Member

    ^I'm just basing this on what the person who explained this to me told me, and it was that it decreases Baltoy starts.
     
  15. Professor Elm

    Professor Elm Active Member

    Well, although Ralts+Call is my desired start, Baltoy still isn't that bad of a starter. It's first attack can get you quite a few cards if you play it right.

    But, the biggest reason is that there are lots of ways to search out basics, but the same doesn't apply to Claydol.
     
  16. Whicker

    Whicker New Member

    I think decreases is the wrong word. 2 minimizes Baltoy starts. Does that help you at all?
     
  17. Shino Bug Master

    Shino Bug Master Front Page News Editor

    Personaly, i don't see why they don't just add in another search card, such as proffesor Elm's or Celio. That being said, you get ploxed too much of the time to use Claydol anyway >.> I prefer 0 claydol 4 cessastion Crystal. But Claydol is a good card nonetheless. the only benefit of 2-3 is that you have a VERY slim chance of all 3 Dol's prized.
     
  18. docdar

    docdar New Member

    2-3 Claydol

    Less Baltoy starts than a 3-3. Still improved chance of getting Claydol T2.
    ......Makes sense to me. :thumb:
     
  19. DeathBerry

    DeathBerry New Member

    I think the person you asked responded as if you were wondering why there weren't 3 Baltoy as well, that logic is just to dumb otherwise. I agree with Whicker on all the other points though, as well as the odd situations you keep using as examples.
     
  20. Killax

    Killax New Member

    To me the main reason why people would do it, is because of call energy/roseanne's and call for family attacks that you will get out your basics, stage 1 is harder because it can only done with bebe (and draw offcourse). And because claydol is a drawer and that's all to it, you wish to save your bebe's to search your stage 2's and lvl xes (pokemon who often are game winners) 3 claydol increase the chance of just drawing one, so you will not discard a bebe ;)

    EditL I also might try it...
     
    Last edited: Jul 31, 2008

Share This Page