Pokémon TCG: Sword and Shield—Brilliant Stars

2011-05-01 BW Sawk 062

Status
Not open for further replies.

waynegg

CotD Editor<br>Forum Moderator
"Before posting, please review the FAQ and follow the Guidelines provided for Card of the Day. Whereas we enjoy opinions of the cards, it is necessary to include a Brief Description for all players to understand your point of view and an optional Rating (ex. x/10). In the future, posts not using the FAQ information may be deleted and reported. Thanks, Mgmt"

[gal=51856]2011-05-01 BW Sawk 062[/gal]​
 
He's a haymaker creature all right...

Anyway, he is solid. Cheap attacks and cheap retreat. However, he doesn't get any better past turn 2, so I'll give him a 6/10.
 
Today's CotD is Sawk from BW...well, put simply, it's not as good as its cousin Throh. Statwise 90 HP is still nice for a Basic, x2 Weakness to :psychic: is eh, no Resistance is common, and :colorless: to Retreat is cheap. Unlike Throh, Sawk is fairly vanilla in approach; you have Low Sweep for 20 for :fighting:, and adding another :fighting: will buy you Beatdown for 40. So yeah...it really just doesn't have the wow factor like Throh.

Modified - 4/10 (Kinda basic, no real reason to run it over something like Throh imo)
Limited - 8/10 (Still an effective big Basic, where arguably its cheaper attacks give it a slight edge in deck making than Throh, though ultimately Throh is better once set up)
Unlimited - 1/10 (No use here either, just nothing that makes him stand out or warrants his use)
 
This card has 90 HP. Good for a basic. The retreat is :colorless: which isn´t that bad. It can´t really endanger your opponent with it´s attacks. 1 for 20, 2 for 40, that sucks! Sawk is maybe good for a starter, but after one turn, it is redundant.

3/10
 
Ok90 hp for a basic is pretty good but not as good as his partners throh The attacks are efficient and fast but they kinda fail after second or third turn. Weakness to psyhicic is not all that bad, but any x2 weakness is still kind of bad. One retreat is really nice, but other than that the only good thing is the artwork. 5/10
 
I must disagree with the above, mediocre ratings, especially the ones that consider Sawk inferior to Throh. That's like going back 10 years and saying Hitmonchan is an average card because it didn't do anything else past turn 3.

1 F for 20; 2 F for 40. 1 Retreat, 90 HP. Outclasses BS Hitmonchan in every way.

Now that trainers, like PlusPower, can be played T1, you'll OHKO most Colorless and Lightning starting Active Pokemon T1. Maybe its not Fighting weak? Then, on T2 you've put 60 damage on the Defending Pokemon, with 2 PlusPower (which isn't unreasonable with the draw power in both MD-on and HS-on), you've done 80. It's called Haymaker.

Compared to Throh, Sawk attacks T1 and does more damage on T2 while Throh is just catching up on T3. Sawk is faster and you all know the phrase: speed kills. So what if there's a resistance to Fighting, retreat for something else. Sawk's 1 retreat makes it easy. Sure, you won't need to retreat to get around resistance when you have Throh, but good luck trying to retreat Throh when the opponent starts Psychic.

In the meantime, we have Expert Belt in format. Department Store Girl for Expert Belt, Sawk is now 110 HP and doing 40 T1. Maybe Pokemon Contest Hall?

Next format, when pokemon like Garchomp + Crobat make hitting for 90 on the bench more of a reality than a dream, this 90 HP BBP is going to look really good.

My rating: 8/10. Only Vileplume or Trainer denial coming from the Bench will scare it.
 
Today we look at Sawk, who seems to be the successor of Base Set Hitmonchan and rival to set-mate Throh. The comparison is quite natural: Sawk is also a Basic Fighting Pokemon that doesn't Evolve as are Throh and Hitmonchan. Hitmonchan does have a "pre-Evolution" in the form of Tyrogue, but didn't when first released. What you saw was what you got. Sawk one ups that Hitmonchan by having 20 more HP, clocking in at an impressive 90. Throh has them both beat with 100 HP, though.All three cards are weak to Psychic Pokemon, taking double damage from them. None of them have any Resistance, which irks. Finishing off the stats, Sawk again scores the advantage by having a single Energy Retreat Cost compared to Hitmonchan needing two Energy, and this time Throh fares worse needing a full three Energy to Retreat.

Moving on, we see all have two attacks and nothing else. Sawk and Hitmonchan tie, each being able to do 20 damage for :)fighting:). Throh, as one would expect given my review yesterday, falls short because his first attack is just too expensive, requiring another Energy. That means Sawk (and Hitmonchan for that matter) can attack twice by the time Throh attacks once, unless your deck has Energy acceleration, a Technical Machine, etc. Even if a deck does, Sawk would just then be able to use its first attack sooner. For the second attack, Sawk does a solid 40 points of damage for :)fighting::fighting:). Both Base Set Hitmonchan and Throh need a Colorless Energy on top of that for their big attacks. Hitmonchan falls flat since he only swings for 40 points of damage. Throh can do a massive 80 points of damage and ignore Weakness, but again needs another Energy invested in order to do that. It is pretty clear that the old Base Set Hitmonchan has been outclassed by Sawk, and since that Hitmonchan was re-released in Platinum, I felt it worth drawing the comparison. What about Throh?

I wasted far, far too much time carefully crafting a long argument before realizing it shouldn't be needed. Anyone who disagrees values the limited Bench disruption or big damage/ability to ignore Resistance of Throh far more than I do. I can see it being useful, but not more useful than quick, cheap damage on a solid body. In either case, I would point out that Sudowoodo, who will still be legal after the rotation, has them both beat. It is another big Fighting Pokemon whose first attack does 20 damage per Energy attached, allowing that first attack to match both attacks of Sawk. Unless you can build a deck that can keep a big, basic Fighting Pokemon alive and can't afford to have it change out to something else for big attacks, Sawk beats Throh, and Sudowoodo beats them both.

Oh, and Sawk is great for Limited play as long as you can afford to run Fighting Energy: you wouldn't need a lot but since it can't use any other type even a single Sawk would need you to run about five or risk it being dead weight quite often. Note that if you are running multiple copies of it or just several Fighting-Type Pokemon and need to make Fighting Energy your primary or at least major secondary Energy type, then that not only doesn't matter but its Energy needs become a plus.

Ratings

Modified (Current): 3/10

Modified (HGSS-On): 6/10

Limited: 8.5/10
 
Okay sawk the new haymaker. . .in my opinion this defiantly does not derserve to be a rare. An uncommon maybe, but not a rare. okay hp, decent retreat, horrible attacks for a rare. So, I'll give it a 3/10
 
In either case, I would point out that Sudowoodo, who will still be legal after the rotation, has them both beat. It is another big Fighting Pokemon whose first attack does 20 damage per Energy attached, allowing that first attack to match both attacks of Sawk. Unless you can build a deck that can keep a big, basic Fighting Pokemon alive and can't afford to have it change out to something else for big attacks, Sawk beats Throh, and Sudowoodo beats them both.
Sudowoodo does have an additional retreat cost over Sawk, but Sudowoodo is a very overlooked card if we're saying Sawk is so good. The two may be interchangeable depending on the meta due to different weaknesses.
 
This COTD is Sawk, from the Black and White expansion. It has 90HP and a Retreat Cost of :colorless:, but the good news stops there. It has a Weakness to the ever-popular :psychic: Type amd 2 mediocre attacks. Its first attack costs :fighting: to do an average 20, add another :fighting: to get an average 40.

Modified: 1/10- It can't be used as a tech or attacker, and it isn't splashable.
Limited: 4/10- The damage output is OK here.
Next Format: 1/10- Still mediocre.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top