Issues Facing the TCG

[Raen]

Jimmy's not the only TO to run smooth tournaments. There are a few who have been doing it for a long time.
But when you get to the really big tournaments, ( States, Reg.) where 8 or 9 rds of swiss ( all with a +3 ) then a top 16, 1 1/2 hour top cut, at some point you gotta give food breaks. You're gonna have more delays, no matter how hard you try not to.
Those tournaments you have to look to because they will be your benchmarks. You have to have the same rules in place for all premier events.
Though I wouldn't mind a time limit on door prizes...

I also have to bring up, on the subject of food breaks, that some people like me have diabetes and really need a break for food, especially at larger tournaments. And for everyone else, it's a nice way to sorta recover and prepare for the rest of the tournament, particularly at larger tournaments. I do think that lunch breaks should be kept short-ish, and it'd be best if food was brought to the players, or if the venue was very close to places to get a quick bite.

And door prizes, while annoying for veteran players, are truthfully a very good draw to get new players interested, and feel like the tournament was worth it even if they did terribly.

 

[Swordfish1989]

If you want to go with the theme of disruption being annoying on the first turn of the game, it's a main reason me and most of my friends stopped playing yu gi oh back in 2005ish. If you went first (I guess Pokemon's equivalent to going 2nd), you could discard almost every card in your opponent's hand before they even drew into anything via cards like Delinquent Duo, Forceful Sentry, etc. It was incredibly annoying, and the worst part was, practically every deck ran those cards for that purpose.

But with disruption, you can at least break out of it at some point if you get lucky or your opponent misplays. I ran Sablelock at one point and had a great disruption going against LuxChomp, but I made a stupid mistake and he got his Cyrus and got himself running. At least there a player has hope, but if you get Donked, well.. that's it.

 

[Scipio]

Then the Luxchomp shouldn't have left the wrong card active. They should have read the opponent and brought up a counter to their plan.

Oooh, so you are going to put up something up front based on that lone Crobat G you see? Or that lone Uxie? Which aren't used at all?
Let me explain Uxie donk to you. Regardless of which poke you start with, the Cyclone energy will see to it that the hardest-to-beat poke ends up on the bench. Step 1 for Uxie is to eliminate the pokes with the lowest HP. Typically, it can do so with 2 pokes with a HP totalling 130/140. Then, it will gauge the active vs the remaining bench. Should the active be easier to KO, it plays Seeker at this point, removing the fatter HP'd one. Should the active be the harder one, Cyclone Energy is played.
Cyclone Energy also nulls any Spiritomb starts (Except Double Tombs).

Suppose you have had your Luxchomp T1. You started Garchomp and played Uxie, and then Call for Luxray and, say, Bronzong.
YOU CAN EASILY LOSE despite having had a good start. And you won't get a second turn to defend yourself.

And that is the whole issue.
Also, if your Beedril donk cannot manage that, then its not a good Beedrill donk. Just sayin.

 

[nnaann]

Up until last year, at events that remained relatively stable in terms of both time and location (States, Regionals, Nationals), there was fairly consistent 30% growth year-by-year every year since 2004. That isn't an increase of 30% compared to 2004 numbers. That's 30% growth over the previous year. Look up Compounding Interest to understand just how remarkable that kind of growth is.

Last year, attendance basically remained constant through both States and Regionals, while US Nationals increased by about 300 players over the year before. That's during the biggest recession period since at least the 80s (and probably since the 30s).

Given the support that this game has on a competitive level, the new and improved support at the local level, and the insistance on SOTG at every level, I don't see attendance dropping this year. I can only see it increasing regardless of the economic situation (outside of the 1930s), and increasing *more* as the economy improves.

I'm not sure if I worded it that well, but I meant that there had been an annual growth of 30% a few years back. It was from one of your posts which I remember that :thumb:. 30% is an incredible figure (even better year on year with compound interest) and considering that there's still alot more room for growth, Pokemon OP has a bright future.

 

[SLOW DECK]

I was Double Donking since SP came out. 80 to bench and 80 to active. I never felt guilty for playing the deck because it really wasn't silly. I pulled the deck out only when I was frustrated with other stuff. It was just fast, and the Long Matches were quite fun. I went 3-5 in Nat's 2008, and had a great time as 4 of my losses my opponent had to play their butt's off to come back and win. The Double Donk would get an occassional triple donk, but needed lot's of heads. Regardless of what people think, Old Uxie donk was competitive in long games because of Mr Mime, Cyclone Energy, and a Uxie Loop. That deck was fast, but not obvertly unfair.

Now, Quadro Uxie Donk does 120-140 damage in pre-attack damage, Seeker Pick Up. 80 to Active. Thus a good Uxie player can CONSISTENTLY strategically KO 2 pokemon on damage drops, Seeker one back to hand, and KO the active on the first trainer turn. Some folks suggest that you just need to modify your deck to avoid the Donk. I submit that one should not have to worry about a DONK when they have 4 pokemon on the board. Yeah, Spiritomb, Gastly, Mesprite, Powerspray, Dialga will stop the deck cold, .... lock if you happen to get those cards.

I just think 4 pokemon Donk's as consistently as it can be done is bad for the Game. I didn't feel guilty Double Donking, but I think now it is just stupid.

My tournament results is really the problem with the deck. I have played the deck at one side event, I went 5 - 0, and only needed 5 trainer turns to do it. I played it once at a cities, T-4'd, went 7-4 in total games, 6 wins first trainer turn, including three win's against 4 pokemon boards. 1 Match went to time, with my opponent unable to keep up with the uxie loop. 1 game I lost because I was donked, 3 games lost because full game Dialga or Spiritomb Trainer Locks. Thus of 16 games I played, only 1 game was at all Interesting because there were several turns going on.

1 out of 16 games interesting, the other 15 matches there wasn't a interactive game. Win or Lose without interactive game play is ultimately bad for organized play.

 

[Rocketman]

I also have to bring up, on the subject of food breaks, that some people like me have diabetes and really need a break for food, especially at larger tournaments. And for everyone else, it's a nice way to sorta recover and prepare for the rest of the tournament, particularly at larger tournaments. I do think that lunch breaks should be kept short-ish, and it'd be best if food was brought to the players, or if the venue was very close to places to get a quick bite.

And door prizes, while annoying for veteran players, are truthfully a very good draw to get new players interested, and feel like the tournament was worth it even if they did terribly.

Kidding about the door prizes. I get this done while the round is playing, then give them out quickly in between rounds. As a player, I have sat waiting to play after we were seated for the round for 25 minutes while door prizes were given out.
If you start your tournament at 1, you should be done swiss by 5. So eat before you come, bring snacks if you want them, and eat when you're done. Sometimes I let top cut eat first, but most of the time they want to play.
If you have a condition where you ned food and meds, the TO is NOT responsibile for this. If you bring your food, and tell the TO before then they could make something work. You will finish some games early, and there will be down time when this can be done.

 

[Raen]

Kidding about the door prizes. I get this done while the round is playing, then give them out quickly in between rounds. As a player, I have sat waiting to play after we were seated for the round for 25 minutes while door prizes were given out.
If you start your tournament at 1, you should be done swiss by 5. So eat before you come, bring snacks if you want them, and eat when you're done. Sometimes I let top cut eat first, but most of the time they want to play.
If you have a condition where you ned food and meds, the TO is NOT responsibile for this. If you bring your food, and tell the TO before then they could make something work. You will finish some games early, and there will be down time when this can be done.

I agree it's my responsibility, no argument there. My point simply was food breaks really make things easier and less stressful for people. While keeping a tournament moving and getting it done quickly is important, player comfort and fun should always be priority, and I think food breaks are an important part of that.

In my opinion, for food breaks to work, the round after the break simply needs to start right on time, and the players need to understand that.

 

[vanderbilt_grad]

The game is incredibly fast now, and it’s 100% the fault of the huge format we have. There are several things that make our game so fast:

1. Uxie. From Kingdra donk, to later Machamp donk, Jumpluff rush, and Rob’s Uxie donk this is the card that changed the game. It’s used in SP for both consistency and speed. Uxie isn’t horrible by itself but mostly in combination with the other 3 things in this list … with them it’s overpowered. (Notable set: LA)

2. Low energy attackers. Say hi to Kingdra, Machamp, Gengar, Jumpluff, Donphan Prime and all those other cards that can easily do 60+ damage for 1 energy. These attacks totally changed the game. DCE can kind of be included here for some cards. It turns CC attackers into single energy drop & go guys. (Notable sets: LA, SF, PT, HGSS)

3. The SP Engine. It’s not just Energy Gain, Cyrus’ Conspiracy, SP-Radar or any of the other individual components … it’s when you put the whole thing together working with very strong SP cards. Crobat G / PokeTurn is one of the more frequently mentioned things for donks, but the entire engine is really much better than what the rest of the format has as well. (Notable set: PT – with some help from RR)

4. Amazing trainers. Poke Drawer+, Pokedex, Luxury Ball, Expert Belt, and many many other trainers allow for decks like Uxie donk and many of the other rush decks. (Notable sets: SF, PT, AR, TM)

The biggest offenders in this list tend to come from LA, SF, & PT. Had those sets rotated we would have a MUCH slower format. The issues folks have with the frequency of donks can be directly tied back to this. With a smaller format we would be playing a VERY different game. While going to 45 min best of 3 is one way to fight donks and playing decks like VileGar is another … the folks in charge have an additional option as well … managing the format differently. They can’t control what Japan gives them but they can control the sets used.

Back when GE was released and PLOX just dominated the big complaint was that the format was too small. LM was frequently cited as a set that had been rotated out too soon. Since that time we’ve heard consistent support from the folks in charge of international play for the idea of a big format. Just my own humble opinion but what we have today is too big. What we had then was too small. If we aren’t going to stick to playing the game exactly the way Japan does then the answer is probably somewhere in the middle.

Sort of unrelated, but along these lines – I’ve wondered how things would be if we dropped a set out of Modified every time a new set was released instead of having one rotation a year. Instead of “rotation in August” or whatever we would have something like “Most recent 8 sets are legal.” Provided 4 sets are released each year then each set would be legal for 2 years after it’s release date. With that in place we would have had SF-UD for Battle Roads this year … PT-TR for Cities … and then SV-CoL for States & Regionals.

 

[Top Cut Comics]

Jimmy's not the only TO to run smooth tournaments. There are a few who have been doing it for a long time.
But when you get to the really big tournaments, ( States, Reg.) where 8 or 9 rds of swiss ( all with a +3 ) then a top 16, 1 1/2 hour top cut, at some point you gotta give food breaks. You're gonna have more delays, no matter how hard you try not to.
Those tournaments you have to look to because they will be your benchmarks. You have to have the same rules in place for all premier events.
Though I wouldn't mind a time limit on door prizes...

Rick,

I don’t think they were, at all, trying to say that ALL other TO's run bad tournaments. However, they ARE out there. We both know that.

Here are some simple thing I do to keep my tournaments timely....

1) My wife is amazing.... She has nearly ZERO computer knowledge, but she is very consistent on getting a tournament set up and VERY diligent about keying the results. She keys them as they come up. Clicks the winner, highlights their name on the result slip, then double checks right there again to save time after the round has completed. This way she does not have to check again after the round has completed.

2) We hand out our door prizes after that particular age group has completed their swiss rounds. IE: Juniors and Seniors are usually done in 4 rounds, while the masters have to play a fifth round. What we do is seat all the masters and start the round. THEN we do all the door prizes for the other age groups. When the masters are done we hand out their stuff. This way its done with everyone watching and gets them all excited to see if their names are going to be drawn.

3) Lunch breaks.... We hold registration from 9am till 9:45am. Start time is prompt at 10am. I WILL NOT UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCE hold up a tournament for anyone who is late. NEVER. With a start time of 10 am, 4 swiss rounds are usually done at 12:30ish... perfect for lunch time.... Masters are generally done with 5 rounds around 1:15. Not too bad for lunch. At that point I offer the top cut a lunch break. I usually start the top cut for all age groups at 2pm ish.... This allows time for deck checks and for us to eat.

4) Listen to your players.... Sometimes they want a break, sometimes they don’t. Especially if its only a top 4. They would much rather spend the time eating a good timely dinner meal than a rushed lunch.

5) Only deck check the juniors and seniors at the beginning of the event. Sure, if there are some new masters playing, I will thumb through their decks to ensure its all legal. However, they are old enough to be responsible for their lists and the consequences that come with it being incorrect.

6) Keep the players informed.... THIS IS REALLY IMPORTANT!!! We all know there are lags between rounds due to the +3 rule. If you have games go a little longer. Let EVERYONE know what the hold up is. It goes a long way when they don’t think its the organizer doing something wrong that’s causing the delay.

7) We do NOT post Match record sheets between rounds. Again, we are putting the ownership in the players hands. If they mark their result slip as the winner/loser and we key it that way. It is what it is. Sure I will try to accommodate where possible. However, I will not repair a round and disrupt everyone else because 1 or 2 people cant properly fill out their result slip.

Rick, I did hold my first state championship last year. I completely understand what you mean by those are the bench marks used for such events. I agree.... We however did hold 8 rounds last year with a top 16 and had everyone out by 10pm. We did not hold a lunch break during our event. We instead started every round on the hour. There was food onsite and everyone had ample time between rounds to eat or relax. They KNEW what time to be back in their seats. No guessing involved.

There is no reason we can’t run efficient tournaments. I’m sure thats all Jason was getting at.

Jimmy

 

[NoPoke]

@V_G: It isn't he number of sets that is a problem rather than the imbalance that a few excessively fast cards always bring to any format.

Set rotation is very hard on players/parents pockets. Sets need to stay in the format for at least a couple of years or the game is very bad value for money compared to the competition.

 

[losjackal]

The biggest offenders in this list tend to come from LA, SF, & PT. Had those sets rotated we would have a MUCH slower format......Back when GE was released and PLOX just dominated the big complaint was that the format was too small.

Okay, so that latter half may explain why TPC decided to increase the size of the format by not rotating any Diamond & Pearl for the 2009-2010 season. Maybe that was the wrong choice, because it set the stage for this year's format which people are arguing is too big. (Should certain cards just not go together? For instance, Uxie LA and Seeker TM. Or, Rhyperior Lv X LA and Mew Prime TM. Because it's only going to get bigger with 2 more sets released before Nationals.)

But what else could the format have been this year? If they rotated through SF to eliminate those biggest offenders, then SP would be very much dominating right now without Machamp and Gyarados to fight back. And if they rotated through to include Platinum (8 sets rotated!), I think there would have been a lot of complaints of too many sets rotated and loss of card value.

So with regards to "Issues facing the TCG", won't the format be somewhat "fixed" after this year and 4 more sets through PL rotated? If so let's just survive (or even thrive) this year and focus on the other problems.

 

[Cardzmaster2004]

Wow, lotta conversation on Donking. I'm gonna try and take this back to the original topic, but def. address the donking issue...:
-------------------------------------

On the topic of length of matches: I'm used to playing 50 minute rounds with M:tG, so long rounds don't seem to big a deal for me. Yes, your play level drops during a long event if you're not mentally prepared for it, but its another thing you have to prep for.

HOWEVER, in that 50 minute (plus 5 turns, btw), it is always Match Play (Best 2 of 3). So, even though the rounds are longer, I play more games, giving each player a more even chance of winning and TecHing with sideboarding between rounds. This makes the long rounds very balanced games.

Having played in multiple day M:tG events, I can say its a huge boost since you've normally played between 8-9 rounds on Day 1 before the Top Cut. Pokemon should AT LEAST give the option to do this for events that have become too large to support in one day (i.e. some select States events and ALL Regionals, plus Nats and Worlds as is).

I do like the current 30 + 3 and don't want this to change. If judges are doing their job correctly, then they should be able to resolve these final turns quickly and watch for players stalling into and during these final turns. The current timing system I have NO issue with and hope it does stay around. I do however have issue with the lack of ID. If a draw system were in place, we would have people playing at a more steady pace IMO because they didn't want to get locked out of a win. A draw system with 30 + 3 should lead tournaments that don't drag on forever...

Those afraid of draws, ask yourself this: Why are you concerned about this? Games go to draws and its easily factored into the scoring system. Yes, if there's a top cut and there are two-3 undefeated players, you can guarantee they're locking their spot in top cut by IDing. This isn't an abuse; this is players using the system to their best advantage. If I've gon undefeated in Swiss up to the last round, I know I want a guaranteed way into the finals. IDing helps top players stay on top instead of gambling on tiebreakers after a loss. And Draws during the tournament shouldn't be too prevalent but, even so, don't count against you as hard as losses and, often, are good for your resistance down the tournament.

On the topic of Match Play: I don't think EVERYONE can ever win when it comes to making a decision in this topic. I personally feel 4 prizes is too high and 1 prize is WAY too low. I say the number should either be 2 or 3, with my personal preference being 3. 3 prizes proves you worked your way to mid-game and you should be rewarded as such with a win if time is called.

On the topic of DONKS (aka T1 Losses): Sadly, its a part of this TCG and there's not a huge way around it. I think that the reruling on PlusPower will help once its released, but until then we're stuck with E. Belt and Beedrill G/Crobat G/Shuppet/Uxie shenanigans. Until we get a new rotation, donks are gonna be around.

Now, should PUI design cards that don't allow this to happen? I don't think so. PUI has seemed to be fine with decks built to Donk and many TCGs have decks that rely on quick swarms of long or mid-range strategies (heading back to M:tG, Goblins and White weenie come to mind. Right now, Kutholda Red does the same). PUI has continued to design cards that allow this to happen and, if they're testing their cards right, they know they're putting these cards into the format. These decks are not my favorite to play, but they are legitimate choices if you think you can pull them off.

OTHER ISSUES:

MULLIGANS: Seriously, having a string of abysmal hand can take your day from 6-0 to 6-3 in a hurry. So why isn't there a mulligan system in this format. The Paris mulligan (7 to 6 to 5, etc.) doesn't work because of the amount of card drawing in the TCG. So, I think there should be a ahrsher, but similar system. If you voluntarily mulligan (not No Basic mulligan) you should required to go to 5 cards AND your opponent draws a card. Next mulligan is to 3 after that. It gives you the option to mull into something more workable while still giving your opponent a HUGE advantage over you in the early game, just like taking a mulligan should.

LACK OF MULTIPLE FORMATS: Seriously, why no 30-card Modified? Why no Extended? Why no Legacy (with a severe ban list)? Yeah, these formats don't INTRINSICALLY make money, but it does spur continued interest in the game. Players will still need newer cards to power their older decks simply because of the power-level of newer Pokemon. I really think its time we started seeing these Eternal formats come to Pokemon, even if just for Invitational tournaments.

POWER CREEP: While Design has done a good job of keeping most Trainers and Supporters in power check (barring Cyrus' Conspiracy IMO), but Pokemon design has not been so kind. Seriously, the power level of pokemon design is WAY too high and cards really need to be tested a bit better if we're going to avoid game killing power creep within the next five years...

~Cardz.

 

[Yoshi-]

Okay, so that latter half may explain why TPC decided to increase the size of the format by not rotating any Diamond & Pearl for the 2009-2010 season. Maybe that was the wrong choice, because it set the stage for this year's format which people are arguing is too big. (Should certain cards just not go together? For instance, Uxie LA and Seeker TM. Or, Rhyperior Lv X LA and Mew Prime TM. Because it's only going to get bigger with 2 more sets released before Nationals.)

But what else could the format have been this year? If they rotated through SF to eliminate those biggest offenders, then SP would be very much dominating right now without Machamp and Gyarados to fight back. And if they rotated through to include Platinum (8 sets rotated!), I think there would have been a lot of complaints of too many sets rotated and loss of card value.

So with regards to "Issues facing the TCG", won't the format be somewhat "fixed" after this year and 4 more sets through PL rotated? If so let's just survive (or even thrive) this year and focus on the other problems.

THisi s basically why people where complaining about the MD-on rotation. And no, PT on wouldnt have been worse, SP without uxie cant just pointlessly burn resources anymore and has to play more consistency, and machamp/mewtwo do what exactly anyway?

 

[Ness]

One thing I do want to discuss is the concept of Turn one losses and whether or not we should complain. Afterall, how do we know that Japan doesn't want there to be turn one wins? With cards like Sableye, which allow a player to play first AND also KO a Pokemon for one energy, it certainly seems like they Japan DID want it. I mean, it's not hard to foresee Sableye was going to win people games on the first turn. Here's the part that confuses and annoys me: For those of you who played since Base Set, remember the early days? Turn one wins were quite common. Whoever played 2nd knew if they opened with one Pokemon, they were in trouble. You'd watch your opponent play Professor Oaks til their deck was at 0 and they had drawn all 4 PlusPowers to score a OHKO for a turn one win. But, a few years later, Japan had a new idea: Supporter cards. No longer could players use Computer Search, Item Finder, Professor Oak to go through their deck in an entire turn. And for a while, say the period of 2004-2006, there weren't nearly as many turn one wins & losses. But then, a few years after that, Japan starts reprinting cards that did exactly what it seemed like they were trying to stop. We got Uxie, and then Sableye, and then worst of all, Crobat G & Poke Turn, and people were being turn oned again. Now, you can open with multiple basics (as many as 4) and get turn oned by a combination of trainer cards & Seeker. It's out of control. What's so confusing to me is why so much effort was put into completely changing the game - literally changing the game, because supporter cards weren't part of the original game, only to go back to the early ages of Pokemon, reprinting PlusPower & Item Finder (now Junk Arm). I mean, does anyone think supporter cards were created for any other reason? They slowed the game down. They fixed the game, and it was working. So why did they take us back to the Ice Age of Pokemon?

 

[Raen]

One thing I do want to discuss is the concept of Turn one losses and whether or not we should complain. Afterall, how do we know that Japan doesn't want there to be turn one wins? With cards like Sableye, which allow a player to play first AND also KO a Pokemon for one energy, it certainly seems like they Japan DID want it. I mean, it's not hard to foresee Sableye was going to win people games on the first turn. Here's the part that confuses and annoys me: For those of you who played since Base Set, remember the early days? Turn one wins were quite common. Whoever played 2nd knew if they opened with one Pokemon, they were in trouble. You'd watch your opponent play Professor Oaks til their deck was at 0 and they had drawn all 4 PlusPowers to score a OHKO for a turn one win. But, a few years later, Japan had a new idea: Supporter cards. No longer could players use Computer Search, Item Finder, Professor Oak to go through their deck in an entire turn. And for a while, say the period of 2004-2006, there weren't nearly as many turn one wins & losses. But then, a few years after that, Japan starts reprinting cards that did exactly what it seemed like they were trying to stop. We got Uxie, and then Sableye, and then worst of all, Crobat G & Poke Turn, and people were being turn oned again. Now, you can open with multiple basics (as many as 4) and get turn oned by a combination of trainer cards & Seeker. It's out of control. What's so confusing to me is why so much effort was put into completely changing the game - literally changing the game, because supporter cards weren't part of the original game, only to go back to the early ages of Pokemon, reprinting PlusPower & Item Finder (now Junk Arm). I mean, does anyone think supporter cards were created for any other reason? They slowed the game down. They fixed the game, and it was working. So why did they take us back to the Ice Age of Pokemon?

It seems to me that, perhaps, Japan simply wanted the game to change over time. By which I mean, if the game was always the same speed, it might get a little stale, and so they wanted a constantly changing game. This isn't a bad thing, except that I believe they went to far; the game is now too fast and too donk oriented. However, if you look at B&W cards (and to a lesser extent HGSS cards), the game seems to once again be slowing down. Maybe they realized their mistake? Maybe they realized that a good chunk of players don't like the donk? I hope so, at least. You can change and adjust the speed of the game without making donks the priority, I believe.

 

[Rainbowgym]

One thing I do want to discuss is the concept of Turn one losses and whether or not we should complain. Afterall, how do we know that Japan doesn't want there to be turn one wins? With cards like Sableye, which allow a player to play first AND also KO a Pokemon for one energy, it certainly seems like they Japan DID want it. I mean, it's not hard to foresee Sableye was going to win people games on the first turn. Here's the part that confuses and annoys me: For those of you who played since Base Set, remember the early days? Turn one wins were quite common. Whoever played 2nd knew if they opened with one Pokemon, they were in trouble. You'd watch your opponent play Professor Oaks til their deck was at 0 and they had drawn all 4 PlusPowers to score a OHKO for a turn one win. But, a few years later, Japan had a new idea: Supporter cards. No longer could players use Computer Search, Item Finder, Professor Oak to go through their deck in an entire turn. And for a while, say the period of 2004-2006, there weren't nearly as many turn one wins & losses. But then, a few years after that, Japan starts reprinting cards that did exactly what it seemed like they were trying to stop. We got Uxie, and then Sableye, and then worst of all, Crobat G & Poke Turn, and people were being turn oned again. Now, you can open with multiple basics (as many as 4) and get turn oned by a combination of trainer cards & Seeker. It's out of control. What's so confusing to me is why so much effort was put into completely changing the game - literally changing the game, because supporter cards weren't part of the original game, only to go back to the early ages of Pokemon, reprinting PlusPower & Item Finder (now Junk Arm). I mean, does anyone think supporter cards were created for any other reason? They slowed the game down. They fixed the game, and it was working. So why did they take us back to the Ice Age of Pokemon?

Not only the supporters slowed down the game, also the removal of double weakness did.
I remember being happy when the +20/+30 weakness was introduced and being sad seeing the double weakness back.
Seeing the new rules Japan made for the game makes you think they don't want those 1 turn games, but on the other hand they made cards to do it.
I never like the "unlimited" format, neither do I like decks like Uxie/Sableye whatever donk.
It turns tournament into something I dislike, games with no interaction between players.

 

[Tagrineth]

We've talked about these issues locally and one thing we all liked was the idea of being allowed one optional mulligan (akin to games like World of Warcraft), which would work EXACTLY like a no-Basic mulligan except you'd have at least one basic.

It would allow you to mitigate the impact of bad-basic opening hands like unown Q or Uxie without giving a boost to donk decks.

 

[DonphanAtoZ]

no no no, Sablelock also suffers this same problem. If they impersonate Judge T1, my entire game revolves around the 4 cards I draw and what I already have in play. The only good news is, that goes for them too.

Dirsuption on the first turn is completely unfair because it denies me the chance to play the game.

Disruption with Luxchomp's speed is also unfair, but not nearly as much. You can tell because people complain! But it's navigable: play a fast deck, like Luxchomp itself, or play something that is able to survive that disruption, which many decks can under the right circumstances: see Jumpluff pre-rotation.



You want to win by not preventing your opponent from having a chance to actually play the game, okay.

What, do you want to pick any four cards from your deck after judge? I LOL'd

 

[Yoshi-]

You dont understand anything anyone is talking about put still post? I LOL`d...

T1 Judge does what exactly? Right, it makes both players reliant on random topdecks, with 7 cards you can expect to get something, but with 5 you can just whiff and scoop. How is that a game of skill? Lets drop the judgebomb and see wo gets the better draw.

 

[bullados]

I like double weakness, because it allows for typematching to actually mean something. It allows for decks to simply be able to type-trump their opponent for the win. It's similar to how the video game works. In basic terms, if you can type-trump your opponent in the video game, you stand a significantly greater chance of winning that battle. Obviously, it's a lot deeper than that, but so is the TCG. Something like Four Corners only works when there are only a limited number of decks in the format. If there are more decks with greater HP and smaller attacks, type-trumping still won't decide a battle. But it will stop the Gardy/Gallade abuses that happened the last couple formats...