Hi everyone, I haven't made a big post on the gym in quite a while, but after reading extensively on Ness's thread on the most serious issues facing our game, and how it ended up turning into an in depth discussion of turn 1 losses or "donks" (copyright Alex 'The Hogger' Brosseau, i'm pretty sure he was the first person I ever heard use that term in pokemon many years ago).
I think the first good point Jason made was, why the big hoo hah all of a sudden? Donks date all the way back to early pokemon TCG Haymakers, where Hitmonchan v. Elecktabuzz openers could Oak/Comp search for Plus powers, attach and energy and win. When Neo Genesis was released, every deck used cleffa (baby, 30 HP basic), and as a result players began to put Tyrogue into their decks. Why was tyrogue considered worthy of a deck spot? He had an attack that for 1 energy did 30 damage, flip a coin, if tails the attack does nothing. Against a lone cleffa opener, you could easily search out tyrogue, attach an energy, and stand a 25% chance at winning the game right there. Your opponent couldn't do anything, you simply won, and best of all, it was a completely legal way to win.
Today's modified is a lot different than the Neo era modified, and whether you agree or disagree that we have a healthy metagame, donks are still very prevalent. Whether it be a lone unown Q facing an Uxie, or something similar, being on the wrong end of a donk just never feels good as a player. You didn't get to test your skill in an intense match, overcome a tough matchup with a little luck, or even lose the game at the last turn to a coinflip, you just sat there helpless and lost.
People frequently compare pokemon at its highest levels to chess in successful players ability to think strategically and plan out complex strategies. I once saw Ness during a fun game lose in 2 turns to a local junior from our area, while Jason *may* have been humoring him, world class players getting bad beats from a lucky player do happen in pokemon. That'd be like Bobby Fischer getting 3 move check mated by a 7 year old, I imagine he wouldn't take it very well. But donks aren't possible in chess, the game by design gives expert players a chance to defend against such early and simple tactics.
A terribly annoying deck that gets a lot of attention in my area is Rob D's frankenstein-like Uxie donk deck. It was around last year, but became way more threatening with the addition of seeker and Junk arm. The whole concept of the deck is to try and turn 1 someone, and I would say slightly more than 50% of the time, it actually works. Ask anyone from my area, playing against that deck is frustrating, annoying, and not fun, you sit there while the other person takes a 15 minute first turn and nearly half the time, lose the game at the end of those 15 minutes. Is it a legitimate strategy? Sure, after losing to it a week prior in swiss, I tried it out at a cities a few weeks ago and ended up 3-2. Seeing the same sad frustrated faces of the people I beat, I felt their pain and probably won't use the deck again. That doesn't mean I wouldn't recommend it for a novice player, its definitely a legitimate strategy for a beginner who wants to stand a chance at beating a seasoned veteran but knows they don't stand a chance in a long drawn out game. (Disclaimer: this deck will probably make you hated by your entire local pokemon community for a long as you use it). Why risk a long game when you can stand a decent chance at beating them right from the start?
I used the same early-win concept when I played magic briefly a few years ago while in college. There was a deck called "Dragonstorm" where if you could generate a reasonable amount of mana in a single turn via spells, you could play the card "dragonstorm," summon 4 dragons that do 5 damage each, and win the game. Usually, this occurred on the 2nd-4th turn. Being new to the game, I knew that this strategy served me well. I would be facing veterans who have been playing the game for years, if I let the game last more than a few turns, not only would I risk misplaying, but they would probably flat out beat me anyways. This deck won me half a dozen friday night magic tournaments, and drew sharp criticism from many of the souless pizza devouring magic veterans at our card shop, who believed that a magic amateur like myself didn't *deserve* to win a tournament, but I did anyways.
In pokemon, there is little you can do to prevent getting donked at least once in a while. As chuck would say, there isn't a person in the world who doesn't run bad at least occasionally. (except he runs bad perpetually) Sure, you *could* stack your deck with 4 smeargle, 4 calls and whatever other openers your choose, but in my mind you really shouldn't have to gimp yourself like that just to rely on having a fair chance to play the game pass the second turn. Players complain all the time about how terrible it feels to get "donked," how somehow cheated they feel, despite it being a perfectly legitimate way to win the game.
To sum up my thoughts, I think what players are really crying out for when they say things like "I wish donks didn't exist," is that they just want every game of pokemon they play to feel "fair." Players want at least a decent chance every single game to test their skills against their opponent, and ideally have the better player win, that is part of what makes playing pokemon fun.
POP has been great recently about really listening to what their players ask for, and coming up with reasonable compromises. The 3 turn extension was a long time coming, and probably the greatest rules change to the game ever. I hope they are listening to some of the great suggestions coming from players about how we could at the very least, reduce donks by giving players a fair chance to play the game past the first or second turn.
P.S. to keep this from turning into a giant trolling thread, please state at the beginning of your reply whether you think donks are/are not healthy for the game, or if you don't care one way or the other. Try and stick to the discussion of early game losses as a whole and not nitpick specific matchups.
I think the first good point Jason made was, why the big hoo hah all of a sudden? Donks date all the way back to early pokemon TCG Haymakers, where Hitmonchan v. Elecktabuzz openers could Oak/Comp search for Plus powers, attach and energy and win. When Neo Genesis was released, every deck used cleffa (baby, 30 HP basic), and as a result players began to put Tyrogue into their decks. Why was tyrogue considered worthy of a deck spot? He had an attack that for 1 energy did 30 damage, flip a coin, if tails the attack does nothing. Against a lone cleffa opener, you could easily search out tyrogue, attach an energy, and stand a 25% chance at winning the game right there. Your opponent couldn't do anything, you simply won, and best of all, it was a completely legal way to win.
Today's modified is a lot different than the Neo era modified, and whether you agree or disagree that we have a healthy metagame, donks are still very prevalent. Whether it be a lone unown Q facing an Uxie, or something similar, being on the wrong end of a donk just never feels good as a player. You didn't get to test your skill in an intense match, overcome a tough matchup with a little luck, or even lose the game at the last turn to a coinflip, you just sat there helpless and lost.
People frequently compare pokemon at its highest levels to chess in successful players ability to think strategically and plan out complex strategies. I once saw Ness during a fun game lose in 2 turns to a local junior from our area, while Jason *may* have been humoring him, world class players getting bad beats from a lucky player do happen in pokemon. That'd be like Bobby Fischer getting 3 move check mated by a 7 year old, I imagine he wouldn't take it very well. But donks aren't possible in chess, the game by design gives expert players a chance to defend against such early and simple tactics.
A terribly annoying deck that gets a lot of attention in my area is Rob D's frankenstein-like Uxie donk deck. It was around last year, but became way more threatening with the addition of seeker and Junk arm. The whole concept of the deck is to try and turn 1 someone, and I would say slightly more than 50% of the time, it actually works. Ask anyone from my area, playing against that deck is frustrating, annoying, and not fun, you sit there while the other person takes a 15 minute first turn and nearly half the time, lose the game at the end of those 15 minutes. Is it a legitimate strategy? Sure, after losing to it a week prior in swiss, I tried it out at a cities a few weeks ago and ended up 3-2. Seeing the same sad frustrated faces of the people I beat, I felt their pain and probably won't use the deck again. That doesn't mean I wouldn't recommend it for a novice player, its definitely a legitimate strategy for a beginner who wants to stand a chance at beating a seasoned veteran but knows they don't stand a chance in a long drawn out game. (Disclaimer: this deck will probably make you hated by your entire local pokemon community for a long as you use it). Why risk a long game when you can stand a decent chance at beating them right from the start?
I used the same early-win concept when I played magic briefly a few years ago while in college. There was a deck called "Dragonstorm" where if you could generate a reasonable amount of mana in a single turn via spells, you could play the card "dragonstorm," summon 4 dragons that do 5 damage each, and win the game. Usually, this occurred on the 2nd-4th turn. Being new to the game, I knew that this strategy served me well. I would be facing veterans who have been playing the game for years, if I let the game last more than a few turns, not only would I risk misplaying, but they would probably flat out beat me anyways. This deck won me half a dozen friday night magic tournaments, and drew sharp criticism from many of the souless pizza devouring magic veterans at our card shop, who believed that a magic amateur like myself didn't *deserve* to win a tournament, but I did anyways.
In pokemon, there is little you can do to prevent getting donked at least once in a while. As chuck would say, there isn't a person in the world who doesn't run bad at least occasionally. (except he runs bad perpetually) Sure, you *could* stack your deck with 4 smeargle, 4 calls and whatever other openers your choose, but in my mind you really shouldn't have to gimp yourself like that just to rely on having a fair chance to play the game pass the second turn. Players complain all the time about how terrible it feels to get "donked," how somehow cheated they feel, despite it being a perfectly legitimate way to win the game.
To sum up my thoughts, I think what players are really crying out for when they say things like "I wish donks didn't exist," is that they just want every game of pokemon they play to feel "fair." Players want at least a decent chance every single game to test their skills against their opponent, and ideally have the better player win, that is part of what makes playing pokemon fun.
POP has been great recently about really listening to what their players ask for, and coming up with reasonable compromises. The 3 turn extension was a long time coming, and probably the greatest rules change to the game ever. I hope they are listening to some of the great suggestions coming from players about how we could at the very least, reduce donks by giving players a fair chance to play the game past the first or second turn.
P.S. to keep this from turning into a giant trolling thread, please state at the beginning of your reply whether you think donks are/are not healthy for the game, or if you don't care one way or the other. Try and stick to the discussion of early game losses as a whole and not nitpick specific matchups.
Last edited:
