Creating a ban/restriction list for a more fun and strategic Pokemon TCG

[AXE]

This is probably one of the most balanced formats Pokemon has had in a while. Every deck has its weakness, I really see no reason at all to ban anything (besides maybe laser).

From reading your posts it seems like you want to try to turn Pokemon in to yugioh, which would be terrible, yugioh has a ban list because they clearly don't test their sets before they release them, not to mention the fact that there is still ALWAYS only 1-2 decks in that game that win, then they ban all the good cards from that deck and another broken deck takes its place, why would you want that for Pokemon?

There is currently nothing wrong with this format, there is no completely over powered deck, every deck has a weakness and can be beaten by another. If you are having a problem beating them.... Well you probably shouldn't be playing terrible cards like zapdos....

 

[signofzeta]

Just saying this, MTG has no banned cards in their standard format.

Any card that is in a set older than Next Destinies, and isn't reprinted in a set Next Destinies and newer are banned.

Yugioh has a banlist because they do not have a rotating format.

Now, if we are talking about the unlimited format, then a banlist could work.

 

[vaporeon]

This is probably one of the most balanced formats Pokemon has had in a while. Every deck has its weakness, I really see no reason at all to ban anything (besides maybe laser).

From reading your posts it seems like you want to try to turn Pokemon in to yugioh, which would be terrible, yugioh has a ban list because they clearly don't test their sets before they release them, not to mention the fact that there is still ALWAYS only 1-2 decks in that game that win, then they ban all the good cards from that deck and another broken deck takes its place, why would you want that for Pokemon?

There is currently nothing wrong with this format, there is no completely over powered deck, every deck has a weakness and can be beaten by another. If you are having a problem beating them.... Well you probably shouldn't be playing terrible cards like zapdos....

I like Zapdos so I use it. I was also using it as a example. Yveltal EX can turn 2 energy into a OHKO. Whether or not I use Zapdos. It does the same thing to Yveltal EX. It does the same thing to darkrai. Its pretty much game over when one has 3 energy and banded. I dont see how you justify a 4 prize trade just to get 2.

- - - Updated - - -

Just saying this, MTG has no banned cards in their standard format.

Any card that is in a set older than Next Destinies, and isn't reprinted in a set Next Destinies and newer are banned.

Yugioh has a banlist because they do not have a rotating format.

Now, if we are talking about the unlimited format, then a banlist could work.

I thought unlimited had a ban list.

 

[Freze]

The thing is not everyone plays a deck with 10 basic, 50 trainers and 10 energy.

Pro strats, why now I know what to play at worlds.

Something this absurd requires and deserves an equally absurd response. How about you stop trying to limit the game and make it how only you want it to be and let the people who are actually running the show, run the show. If one wants to comment or suggest an improvement fine. Do it. That is of course unless one has done it multiple times before and each and every time the suggestion is rightfully laughed into the ground and compared to trash, which really is an insult to trash for trash has never done anything as bad as this.

So go along and play with your Zapdos, complain that Leafeon is broken and view Mega Charizard to be totally overpowered.

 

[Mekkah]

The most hilarious thing about this banlist is how you can play an almost standard Virgen list and enjoy 4+ Red Signals while no other deck can use more than 1 Lysandre/Catcher. In fact with all other forms of acceleration limited to 2, no deck is going to be able to keep up with Emerald Slash, even though G-Booster is banned. Just gotta play another Ace SPEC and maybe some Deoxys, and you're good to go. Rayboar is not a threat to this deck anymore because you put SER and ER to 1 and limited decks to playing only 2 Emboar, pretty much ruining the entire archetype.

Speaking of Rayboar, you seem to really despise OHKOs but then don't ban Rayquaza EX, pretty much the only good card that actually OHKOs every single thing in the game. Okay.

Plasma decks still seem dominant too. Sure, they lose Colress Machine, but since every other deck has slowed down a ton it's no issue to just power up Lugia with Raiden Knuckles, or use those Plasmas for Red Signals instead. With Enhanced Hammer limited to 1 and Sableye banned, the deck can run all the Special Energy it wants. A great boost in diversity!

 

[SuperWooper]

The format is pretty nice right now. If I had to create some kind of banlist, I'd just limit Hypnotoxic Laser (and maybe Muscle Band) to 2 copies. Oh, and print Tropical Beach as a promo.

 

[vaporeon]

@ Freze
If the world had your mindset, slavery would still be a thing, considering those who were pro it "laughed it into the ground like the trash it was". There was even a huge war about it, though I'm not willing to go that far.

@Mekkah
There were some cards I did forget to add to the list. I considered a ban on Rayquaza EX but forgot to put it on the list. I also meant to add Deoxys to the restriction list and put it at 1. Plasma will still be good but not unbeatable because things like Landorus EX is still out there. Maybe limit Thundurus EX but I don't think its really needed. Plasma is good because of kyurem and Thundurus EX, using small about of energy to do big damage. With a limited colress machine and Deoxys at 1, as well as laser, they don't do that huge amount of damage, which it what the deck does. It would not take more turns to utilize Lugia.

 

[SMP88]

@ Freze
If the world had your mindset, slavery would still be a thing, considering those who were pro it "laughed it into the ground like the trash it was". There was even a huge war about it, though I'm not willing to go that far.

You instantly lose any argument when you compare the Pokemon TCG to slavery in any way.

 

[vaporeon]

You instantly lose any argument when you compare the Pokemon TCG to slavery in any way.

I wasn't comparing it to the TCG. I was comparing it the line of thinking that many here have shown. The second someone does something against the opposition, its instantly shun in the Pokemon community if it does not come from the higher ups.

I should not be amazed that most here don't want to help though. Seems like many post just to spite me.

 

[FunnyBear]

These sorts of threads have become tiresome. We understand you want to build "rogue" decks and it is surely difficult when the meta decks are so overpowered. That didn't stop truly creative players from succeeding with Flygon/Accelgor, Weavile/Eggs/Lopunny, and Aggron/Sableye. These people didn't campaign to change the format so they would be more successful, they succeeded within the format. Maybe you should try to be more like them instead of trying to nerf the format so you can win with your "creative" ideas.

 

[evil psyduck]

All i can say is thank god the OP doesn't decide these things.

 

[yoshi1001]

I took a different approach to the problem when I created a custom format about a year ago. My goals were to be:

1. Substantially different from the current modified-I don't claim my format is perfectly balanced or anything, but with most of the legendaries and virtually all EXes gone, it does focus on different cards.
2. Relatively cheap.

The reason for these is that the format needs to be different enough to attract interest but accessible enough for folks to make the investment. Additionally, with any sort of alternative format, you should plan on making at least two decks yourself.

 

[vaporeon]

I took a different approach to the problem when I created a custom format about a year ago. My goals were to be:

1. Substantially different from the current modified-I don't claim my format is perfectly balanced or anything, but with most of the legendaries and virtually all EXes gone, it does focus on different cards.
2. Relatively cheap.

The reason for these is that the format needs to be different enough to attract interest but accessible enough for folks to make the investment. Additionally, with any sort of alternative format, you should plan on making at least two decks yourself.

Thats kind of the idea here. With that list, the top decks are still good, just not dominate and will give other decks the chance to compete with them as well. The list does need work but I feel its heart is in the right place.

I was hoping people here would want to critically analyze the Pokemon TCG with unbiased eyes and perhaps say something should be done but I should have know better.

- - - Updated - - -

All i can say is thank god the OP doesn't decide these things.

I wont be the only one deciding the list though. Many reviews and testing goes into them. I provide what I think needs to be addressed and we test it thoroughly. If it turns out catcher at 2 is better than 1, then it moves. If it turns out that M/ Charizard EX does not ruin the new format we're trying to create then it either comes off the list or is restricted.

The big keyword people here seem to miss is TEST. You test these things before you force it on people.

- - - Updated - - -

These sorts of threads have become tiresome. We understand you want to build "rogue" decks and it is surely difficult when the meta decks are so overpowered. That didn't stop truly creative players from succeeding with Flygon/Accelgor, Weavile/Eggs/Lopunny, and Aggron/Sableye. These people didn't campaign to change the format so they would be more successful, they succeeded within the format. Maybe you should try to be more like them instead of trying to nerf the format so you can win with your "creative" ideas.

If you feel these threads are beneath you, then dont respond if you have nothing constructive to say. The decks you listed are nothing new and have existed before, plus I have no issue beating them and find them more fun to play against but you dont see them winning tournaments. I also succeed within the format, have a very positive tournament record when I choose to play, however, that still does not mean there aren't cards I feel should be looked at.

 

[Axew]

This is legitimately one of the worst posts I've read in a long time. And that's taking into account that I'm reading PokeGym

get better and stop crying about cards being good because once we get a ban list and you still can't win with articuno ex you'll just want more and more cards banned

 

[Krusiv]

The big keyword people here seem to miss is TEST. You test these things before you force it on people.

Then you just need to find like-minded people to test this with. Sorry to say but I don't think many here would be willing to help since they don't agree with you.

 

[Pokealjovin]

Restrictions are not new in Pokémon, think of the ACE SPECS. The Computer Search card has been ruled an ACE SPECS card. Other cards have been made restricted in that way. This would work as well.

Coming from someone who is just coming back to the game, what I find the toughest part in our league is new players. And this is where it could be better for them. When I play with the new players, (or even younger players) I do not use my best deck, as they don't generally stand a chance at all. Even with my cobbled up decks, I win most of the time.

For them, playing against me, if I'm not using one of my less-effective decks, is not fun. This is the issue I find in the current meta game; If your deck is not built up with 4-10 EX, you end up not able to play with the more competitive members of the league. In our league, those competitive members includes me, my older son and a friend. Everyone else has more "theme" decks equivalents.

However, instead of out-right banning cards, I'd be inclined to add to the ACE-SPEC group (the Hypotoxic Laser comes to mind). The actual card is still useful, but has a lesser impact on the game.

As for the Pokémons, I would play with the idea of having Unique Pokémons. Say the EX versions, you can have 4 in your deck, but only one in play at a time. This could easily be applied without changing decks (though, if it was an official rule, people would start working around it and their decks would just be adapted).

What you are looking for, I think, is to allow new players to be "in the game" faster.

In our league (only 2 months old), the "big players" are not that strong in deck building, I've played in tournaments in another league, but only ranked 6th (out of 9) masters. So we have growth to make, but we can't play the decks we've played at the tournaments at our league, unless we play against one of the other "big players" (3 out of the 13 members of the league...).

I think that the EXTENDED format is actually an attempt to reset the clock on the TCG, the format is not the same with BW and up, or at least, that's how I view it with my limited exposure to the game.

 

[vaporeon]

Then you just need to find like-minded people to test this with. Sorry to say but I don't think many here would be willing to help since they don't agree with you.

Catering to like-minded people is one of the problems with the world. No challenge at all for progress. Debates are far better because minds can be changed.

 

[Freze]

I wasn't comparing it to the TCG. I was comparing it the line of thinking that many here have shown. The second someone does something against the opposition, its instantly shun in the Pokemon community if it does not come from the higher ups.

I'm sorry, but please do not straw man what I said.

''If one wants to comment or suggest an improvement fine. Do it. That is of course unless one has done it multiple times before and each and every time the suggestion is rightfully laughed into the ground and compared to trash''

Look at what I said. I only said that if someone has attempted to change the game multiple times and each time it is not accepted, rightfully mind you, then one should not suggest again. Of course there is no concrete line between multiple and a few times, but I trust you understand what I am saying.

Now you may think what does the addition of the word rightfully mean? It means that at the very least someone (in this case not me) has provided an argument or case as to why this is a terrible idea. Not someone using their leverage due to being a higher up.

Also you did create a false equivalency and a major one as mentioned by SMP88. As a side note you seem to be complaining about spiteful or better said ad hominem comments towards you. If someone says you are wrong, why you are wrong and attacks you the situation is not significantly spiteful or ad hominem. Notice as well that those three pieces mentioned do not have to be done by the same person or in that order. If you read the pages here, you will realize that all three are present and rather than saying that people are being rude or spiteful explain why they are wrong or better yet do not attempt to do so, as doing so would make you look worse.

 

[vaporeon]

I'm sorry, but please do not straw man what I said.

''If one wants to comment or suggest an improvement fine. Do it. That is of course unless one has done it multiple times before and each and every time the suggestion is rightfully laughed into the ground and compared to trash''

Look at what I said. I only said that if someone has attempted to change the game multiple times and each time it is not accepted, rightfully mind you, then one should not suggest again. Of course there is no concrete line between multiple and a few times, but I trust you understand what I am saying.

Now you may think what does the addition of the word rightfully mean? It means that at the very least someone (in this case not me) has provided an argument or case as to why this is a terrible idea. Not someone using their leverage due to being a higher up.

Also you did create a false equivalency and a major one as mentioned by SMP88. As a side note you seem to be complaining about spiteful or better said ad hominem comments towards you. If someone says you are wrong, why you are wrong and attacks you the situation is not significantly spiteful or ad hominem. Notice as well that those three pieces mentioned do not have to be done by the same person or in that order. If you read the pages here, you will realize that all three are present and rather than saying that people are being rude or spiteful explain why they are wrong or better yet do not attempt to do so, as doing so would make you look worse.

Again, that comment was made to sure the line of thinking here when it comes to new ideas. No one here is wrong or right, which is why I would like to test these things so I can see if it will work or not. Just saying it won't work (like everyone here is saying) without any evidence. I'm taking notes on what being said here and nothing is being said as to why the cards I listed don't need to be banned or restricted.( A argument can be made for a few post)

I also challenge comments about be when a player knows nothing of me or my play style and says such things like they are right. No one on Earth likes it when people make up things about someone when they are on a public forum. Those things can be see as rude.

 

[Freze]

I'm taking notes on what being said here and nothing is being said as to why the cards I listed don't need to be banned or restricted.( A argument can be made for a few post)

I also challenge comments about be when a player knows nothing of me or my play style and says such things like they are right. No one on Earth likes it when people make up things about someone when they are on a public forum. Those things can be see as rude.

Well at least you do say that a few posts say why not, but I suppose, due to your blindness, the situation must be rectified. This has to be done so that even you can understand how this list is bogus and how the very idea is not fitting for this kind of card game. Well to be honest the idea of side decks and bans in general have been dealt with prior, but as you wished, as shown by the highlighted quote, the list you provided is about to receive a painful probing.

Banned- 0 Per Deck/Side Deck

G-Booster

This card is played in one deck that has not really dominated the game for an extended period of time. Sure an argument can be made that it was the BDIF, but not for overly long or by an overly large gap. This card also comes with a significant drawback, which is namely not being able to play other ace spec cards, such as Dowsing Machine, which is arguably stronger. (As a side note dowsing machine is conveniently not on the list despite being basically the undisputed most played ace spec in the format. Yeah it does not look good for this list off the bat)

M Charizard- Flash Fire 013,069,107,108

No form of Mega Charizard EX has been seen in any serious competitive deck. Have a look at nationals results from around the world. Yveltal variants, Virgen and Plasma among others are the decks that are doing well. Despite this you want to ban Mega Charizard? Come on now.

Charizard EX- Flash Fire 012

The idea of a ban list is to correct the problems in a game, at least I presume, though considering how this list looks, I doubt that. It seems like you want to cater the game to suit you, not actually be the best it can be. That being said, where has Charizard EX ever been game breaking? Answer: No where. Next.

Black Kyurem- Plasma Storm- 095

For once a card you could make an argument for... in the past. This card game has a trend to try and correct itself with the addition of new sets. Of course it does not always succeed, but it attempts to do so. And what do you know, it worked this time. Druddigon makes it so that this card is no longer a problem.

Sableye Dark Explorers

One of the best card ever printed, sure. However once again the game has corrected itself. No serious deck runs more than one sableye. I mean when I won nationals a few weeks back, I played one sableye. Never did I use it in a game that I won. This card is so broken. /sarcasm.

Crushing Hammer

This list is getting repetitive. Hammer spam was a thing for a while and not really overpowered ever, but it is barely viable now. You want to kill it? Kill a tier 2 deck for diversity. Please tell me you understand how messed up that is.

Mewtwo EX

When was Mewtwo EX last a major major threat? Oh let me think, I suppose one year ago. I mean sure it was decent after that, but never really best card in format since then. Ban it to 0 copies per deck? Smrat.

Yveltal EX

The single handed best card in format at the moment. Best card ever printed? Maybe, but probably not. One of the best offensive cards ever printed? Definitely. However once again consider why would you ban this card to 0 copies in a deck. No deck could play 1 Yveltal EX and would be broken because of it. However if there is a single card in the game that deserves a nerf, it is this and hypnotoxic laser. (Side note: This is not bias against these cards because I hate them per se, I won nationals playing both in high quantities of my own free will, if I have free will, but that is not part of this discussion)

Dark Claw

Let's ban Dark Claw entirely, but not ban Muscle Band entirely. Why? Hint: Dark Claw is 100% outclassed and essentially a worthless card now, except for possibly better artwork in an entirely dark deck. That warrants a ban. Suuuuuure.

Let's take a break here and notice that there are so far 0-1 cards that should be limited. Good job.

Limited- 1 Per Deck/Side Deck

Professor Juniper/ Professor Sycamore

Nothing about these cards is inherently overpowered. I have never lost a game because my opponent played a Juniper. Seriously looking back at history, this is not even one of the best supporters ever made. Sure it is good, but Collector, Roseanne, Mentor, Cyrus and Castaway to name a few a pretty much better. And there was no need to ban them. Get the point?

Enhanced Hammer

Hey let's ban a nerfed Lost Remover to one copy per deck. Tell me you see how that is so stupid.

Hypnotoxic Laser

Uuuuuuh a second kind-of almost legitimate card to nerf. Nothing to say here. HTL is strong and I suppose if one wanted, one could test it with some for of restriction. However there is no real need for that as the game has been made with HTL in mind, so other decks not playing HTL now, would get a massive boost if this were banned. That is of course unless you nerf them too. Wait a second... that is exactly what you are doing. Meddling with the format so that it is how you want it to by making it worse. Lower everything except a select few from a 100 to a 50. Does nothing, but help the select few. You should become a politician. Oh wait never mind, every suggestion you make is unpopular. Go become a republican.

Pokemon Catcher

This card is not broken at all anymore after the nerf of a coin flip. Sure it brings luck, but it is not broken. A card game will have luck. Coin flips are a part of this game. Get out of here.

Lysandre

This is a supporter of a previously great card, making it balanced. In the history of this game the Gust of Wind effect has been used to great success, bar Catcher no flip/Gust of Wind and arguably Reversal/Catcher with flip. Did I just contradict myself? No. Catcher with flip is not a ban worthy offense, as it does not break the game, however it is not a success.

Klinklang (Plasma Steel)

Not played. Next.

Energy Retrieval

Broken. So broken. I can't believe how broken this card is. I mean my opponents forfeit whenever I have two energy in my hand.

Superior Energy Retrieval

Above on steroids, but nowhere near being broken. Cards can abuse this card and the previous card, but even they cannot abuse them in a broken fashion, but even if they could, it would not make this and the above card broken.

Professor Letter

Great card. Broken? No. Reason? Two energies provides consistency, however it does not instant win you the game or give a massive unfair advantage.

Leafeon -Plasma Freeze- 011

No winning deck bar two have even played Leafeon. Only one of these decks really did well. It did not dominate the format. It did not have Leafeon front and center. Leafeon is not broken and no four Leafeon in play is not an automatic win. Come back to reality.

Reality check: At best you have listed 2 cards that could be nerfed, not banned, but I'll grant you that. 2/19. Great list.

Limited- 2 Per Deck/Side Deck

Aromatisse (Fairy Transfer)

Has won no nationals if I recall correctly. If it has, at least not many. Not broken. Not over centralizing. Not ban worthy.

Emboar (Infernal Fandango)

A good card no doubt. Has it dominated the format? Yeah, thought so.

Blastoise (Deluge)

This deck was possibly BDIF for a while. Then it was nerfed with things like Druddigon and it is no longer an issue. Do not kill it further. You cannot create fun and strategy by limiting decent (read: not broken) archetypes.

Keldeo EX

Again is not a problem, unless it's checks are removed. Oh wait, you want to ban Mewtwo and Yveltal? Why on Earth? A game has been designed by its creators in a way that would not be broken (and it currently is not broken) so banning something could upset the situation as it does here. In the real world this card is not an issue.

Garbodor

Garbodor blocks abilities in a way that requires a stage 1 and a tool, which your opponent can remove. How is this broken?

Trevenant

Trainer lock is annoying, but Trevenant has not dominated the game or won anything significant or done anything seriously note worthy. Not broken.

Dark patch

A third candidate for something that could be nerfed as it has created a deck that has been on top of the game for a long time (Side note: On top, not dominated). This, like Yveltal and HTL, is something one could consider a nerf on. Except that it will be rotated in a month and a half. On top of that it has not stood on top of the game alone, except during 2012 Worlds.

Blacksmith

Has yet to prove any level of overpowered characteristics? Therefore the logical conclusion is to ban it. Seems logic.

Colress Machine

Is speed Lugia a problem for the game? Answer: No. Is a deck that abuses this a problem for the game? Answer: No. Is this used in one or maybe two decks? Answer: Yes. Does this make it broken? Answer: No.

Muscle Band

Oh here we are. Dark Claw > Muscle Band my friends. Dark Claw > Muscle Band. Now tell me. Which deck in the format gets an unfair advantage from this card? Oh wait, every deck can play it and no deck can play it in such a way that is greatly better than at least a few other decks. Not broken.

Silver Bangle

You complain about overpowered EX cards. Then you ban a card that balances the situation. What do we call that? You decide.

Max Potion

No deck abuses this card. No deck. None at all.

N

A great supporter no doubt. Much needed in this format as no searching supporters or draw Pokémon exist. It is vital for consistency. It also brings in a form of deck management for the late game, which is skill, which falls under the category of strategy. You want to make this more strategic. Your plan to do so: Step 1: Remove strategy. Step 2: God knows. Step 3: ??? Step 4: Profit. (Side note: This plan is so bad that a mere 3 step plan without ??? or god knows would not have sufficed.)

That was that. How many even debatable cards were there, when I am being generous? 3? Out of? 32. 3/32.

I don't know why, but you seem to want to ban most playable cards even though they are not breaking the game in anyway. Good does not equal a ban worthy offense. Great does not equal a ban worthy offense. Playable does not equal a ban worthy offense. The only thing that equal a ban worthy offense is if something is broken and arguably you have mentioned 3 cards that are exceptionally good, but not broken necessarily.

Returning back to what I said. You are wrong. I just showed why. Now you say you play Zapdos and that this list represents what you think is broken. This qualifies people to make judgements about how you play the game. I will refrain from doing so as this post was quite aggressive, but how could it not be? Otherwise it would have been much too boring to type up. As a final side note, the language in this post is overly crude due to the length and time I typed it, as well as the fact that it was so repetitive due to the nature of the task.