Issues Facing the TCG

[BANGINBOX]

Have donk decks been winning a lot of tournaments?

While I cant tell you for sure, what their win percentage is, this is not my biggest concern.

I am more concerned for the people who do not make it into a top cut situation due to a donk.

You hear it all the time. What gets me is.... PEOPLE ARE ACTUALLY PROUD WHEN THEY DO IT??? Like they actually accomplished something amazing. Pride is not defined by taking short cuts. DID YOU APOLOGIZE FOR THAT WIN? You really should.

While I dont play much anymore, I see and hear the stories from my players. Some spent weeks testing all the meta matchups, building, re-building, testing, studying, then testing some more.... Only to miss the cut by only having 1 turn in the final round. Silly stuff....

Its enough to turn me off, thats for sure.....

Losing to someone who honestly doesnt care about the game, or the time and effort it takes to do well at it, really ticks me off.... Those of you who know me, will chuckle and HAVE to agree. I feel slighted by a flaw in the game.

Maybe Chess is for me.... NO donks there....

Jimmy

 

[Scipio]

How are donks unpreventable?

And I'm not saying 4 Call/Tomb/Smeargle; I'm just saying that some of these are quite common. Maybe taking out a Sableye or 2 and adding in some Smeagles can help you not to get donked in Gyarados. Maybe Calls would have helped your deck anyways. Spiritomb may just be added if needed.

@BM
Well, for me, I don't really want to donk my opponent. That;s just my opinion.

I've been donked before, and I treated it like a loss. I don't see why people are complaining about something that can be easily prevented and is just a normal game.

So suppose I do all that. I play, shall we say VileGar? I play 8 basics that prevent donks by being a trainerlock, 4 Call Energy.
I can still get donked by lolSableye. Or perhaps I have an Oddish start. Ergo, THEY ARE UNPREVENTABLE because they are completely luck based. Anyone saying that pulling a donk like "Machop Candy Machamp Energy Game" requires a droplet of skill can jog on.
Admittedly, building a deck that can pull that kind of stuff consistently, that does require skill. Playing it, however? Nuhuh.

@ Jimmy: Iunno about losing a huge portion. I started playing late 2006, and the player base hasn't really grown a lot since then. I see new people every few tournaments, but I also see people disappearing. Maybe you're right and a slight downfall will occur, but most of the bad players are in it for the Pokemon anyway, not for the prizes. Only the bad players who only care for win win win win win will be out.
To be fair, thats not the kind of player Pokemon should want anyway. After all, Pokemon is initially geared towards little kids who want to play a game with their favorite creatures. The competetive aspect comes second.
This is also part of why I believe donks drive away kids from the game. Suppose I have a kid at league. After about 8 weeks, he's ready to go to a tournament with a deck configured around his favorite pokemon that should be able to at least have interesting games. Not a tourney winner, the kid would know this, but definitely something to play around with.
He has his parents shell out money to:
A - Drive him to the area (By car or train)
B - Pay for food on site (Unless they pack a home made lunch, which btw more Americans should try to remedy those sickening long breaks you guys have)
C - Pay the €5 Entry Fee (I know thats not the case in the USA, but bare with me)
All together, a day of Pokemon easily costs about 20-25 Euros. 10-15 if its close by home. Not accounting for what the parents will do all this time.
Then its announced that being a junior, the kid gets to play a grand total of 3 rounds with no top cut.
Game 1 he gets donked, game 2 he has a bye and game 3 ends in another donk.
Does that leave a good impression to the kid? Nope. The parents will hear this and see the disappointment (heck, even ONE donk might do that) and will think twice about bringing the kid to the tournament or even the league again.

...that writeup ended up longer then I intended.

Oh and Porii, I quote "I do not want to donk my opponent". Yet you play a donk deck.
...
...

Thats like the guy saying "I dont like to KO something this way but...Take Out" we had here last year.

 

[Elite_4_Allen]

why has this turned into a thread simply about complaining about donking?

 

[baby mario]

Ummm . . . maybe because it's one of the 'issues facing the TCG' that Ness talked about in the first post?

Just a wild guess.

Game is more fun for players without donks. I know that donking has always been possible, but right now we seem to have more than our fair share of cards that seem designed to donk. I'm not going to moan about it, but at the same time I won't be sad when the culprits get rotated out.

 

[The Gorn]

While I cant tell you for sure, what their win percentage is, this is not my biggest concern.

I am more concerned for the people who do not make it into a top cut situation due to a donk.

You hear it all the time. What gets me is.... PEOPLE ARE ACTUALLY PROUD WHEN THEY DO IT??? Like they actually accomplished something amazing. Pride is not defined by taking short cuts. DID YOU APOLOGIZE FOR THAT WIN? You really should.

I'm going to start dropping after I get donked. Leave the tournament to all the donk deckers. I don't need it.

 

[Kayle]

How are donks unpreventable?

How are they preventable?

I know not that long ago I was making a point about how you can improve your consistency by changing your list, and that's true, but consistency isn't number of basics you start with. In a normal match playing oh I don't know Gyarados, starting Sableye + Collector is gold to me. That's awesome consistency right there, nothing else needs to be said. But, that doesn't do ANY good against a donk. To defend against a donk, I would need to start with a Mesprit in hand (which is a one-of tech for me, so 12% chance) AND something with more than 70 HP to prevent Belt/Pluspower shenanigans, which even then still can overwhelm me.

In a conventional deck, even by this format's lopsided standards, you run 4 "starter Pokemon" maximum (of which Smeargle is not one, by the way. Smeargle is more of a midgame/recovery Pokemon than a starter.) sheerly because too many more is just wasted space. And you're going to say that I should stop whining because I can waste space to avoid donks?

Yeah... no.

And I'm not saying 4 Call/Tomb/Smeargle; I'm just saying that some of these are quite common. Maybe taking out a Sableye or 2 and adding in some Smeagles can help you not to get donked in Gyarados. Maybe Calls would have helped your deck anyways. Spiritomb may just be added if needed.

Smeargle doesn't do you any good against getting donked in Gyarados, really. It's a whole 10 HP difference, and in exchange, you lose a huge amount of your speed by starting Smeargle.

Suppose I ran 4 Spiritomb and 4 Call, because I play Vilegar. It's worth noting that it is still possible to donk a lone Spiritomb start, particularly with your good friend Beedrill G (start with a Collector and a Bat or Beedrill in hand, you can get Q, two Bats and a Beedrill in total, retreat for the drill, energy, two bites, GG). There are better ways to model this, but I'm going to just be simple about it. The odds (and I mean I went through and calculated them... even though I should have it memorized by now) of starting with one of my four Tombs is about 40%. The odds of starting with both Tomb and Call are significantly less: 16%. So that means against a donk-oriented deck, only 40% of the time will I have even a half decent defense against the first turn win, and only 16% of the time I will have a strong one? What else would you suggest I run?

Let's also not forget that first-turn KOs, even if they don't lose you the game, are severely disorienting and no deck in the format is really prepared for it. Luxchomp can handle turn 2 or 3 KOs with excellent grace, but in their initial setup they might be relying on whatever they have active right now - having to go back and dig it up again after it's been knocked out slows it down, making it easier to keep plowing through them because your deck is designed to perform for just the first few turns, but by pumping out 80-100 damage each time. Starting with Call Energy against an opposing donk deck is not that helpful for two reasons - firstly, the aforementioned disruption (sure, you got two extra Pokemon before they could really hurt you, but then they knocked out that first one and left you without an energy attachment... and they'll knock out whatever you promote, too!!!), and secondly, SOME decks can take out multiple Pokemon on the first turn. See Uxie or Jirachi.

It's one thing if I lead Garchomp + DCE against my opponent's 50-hp Oddish or something, and I scramble for the double bat for KO. This occurrence is very rare, but it is a natural part of the format right now: with things that can do 30-50 on the first turn, you need to be very careful picking your Basics to avoid those KOs. I have no problem against this kind of donk. Last year, I kept telling people that if they didn't want to get donked with Jumpluff, they shouldn't be playing Jumpluff - Hoppip's low HP was an inherent weakness to the deck, it was part of the deck's DESIGN. (You can also be awesome, like me, and run 2 bats so you lead with one every game. /kid) This is the kind of donk that Top Cut is designed to avoid.

My problem is with donk-oriented decks, ones that are designed to capitalize off of the fact that I simply cannot reliably lead strong against you at all. There is no deck in this format that can say it is undonkable. And I doubt there ever will be such a deck!

Well, for me, I don't really want to donk my opponent. That;s just my opinion.

You don't want to donk your opponent so you play Beedrill G donk.

??????

 

[Cyrus]

Jimmy, I don't know of many instances where donk deckers are PROUD of their donk, so much as just "excited." If this were the case, then I too would be very disappointed that someone took pride in his/her deck functioning - that's what a deck is supposed to do! However, most (but not all) people who I've seen play donk decks are just gambling addicts who are in it for the thrill, new players, or horribly misguided in their deck theory for the day.

Either way, a problem with this format in general is how unhealthily stale it is relative to the glory days of 2004-2006, or even 2007. The new set pushes the envelope some, but not necessarily all in good ways (e.g., Seeker donks).

 

[Nintendan]

I agree donks are unhealthy for the game, however, it's a method to win - a strategy. Yes, it may be the most ridiculous way to win, but it's a way. Like camping in COD or whatever. It's stupid, but it works.

 

[butlerforhire]

banginbox was frank but entirely correct in his assessment of donks and skill level. How many top-level players like donks, or gear their decks around achieving them? I can't think of any. Why is this? Because they know how to outplay their opponents; they can handle actually playing the game, not ending things before they ever get started.

If you champion donks-- ie. you adamantly defend them, you play nothing but donk decks, you truly believe you are a good player because you can donk your opponent-- then you don't belong at the top tables, and if you do end up there now and again, you won't be there long. Legitimate players with legitimate decks will knock you out.

Now, if you accept donks when they arise naturally in a game, you're just doing what you are supposed to in a flawed format with arguably flawed rules (ie. some disagree with the entire mechanic of losing by bench-out). No matter how "balanced" we ever get a card pool to be, though, donks are still going to happen. The issue is their frequency. In a perfect TCG universe, donks should be as rare as decking out. We just don't play in a perfect TCG universe.

 

[bullados]

There are also two different types of donk.

There's the LOLOLOLGarchompDCEGainLOLOLOLOLI'mamazing donk.

And then there's what Rob put together.

I have a lot more self-respect losing to something like Uxie Donk because I know it's a fairly esoteric and complex play, and it took a lot of skill to see the combo and build around the combo and refine the combo to the point where he has that one refined.

I severely dislike the Garchomp thing.

Neither is good for the game. But the Garchomp thing IMO is worse than the Uxie thing.

 

[Ness]

There are also two different types of donk.

There's the LOLOLOLGarchompDCEGainLOLOLOLOLI'mamazing donk.

And then there's what Rob put together.

I have a lot more self-respect losing to something like Uxie Donk because I know it's a fairly esoteric and complex play, and it took a lot of skill to see the combo and build around the combo and refine the combo to the point where he has that one refined.

I severely dislike the Garchomp thing.

Neither is good for the game. But the Garchomp thing IMO is worse than the Uxie thing.

You have more respect for someone who spent hours TRYING to find a way to turn one you than the person who just accidentally turn ones you because you drew a bad hand?

 

[Kayle]

There are also two different types of donk.

There's the LOLOLOLGarchompDCEGainLOLOLOLOLI'mamazing donk.

And then there's what Rob put together.

I have a lot more self-respect losing to something like Uxie Donk because I know it's a fairly esoteric and complex play, and it took a lot of skill to see the combo and build around the combo and refine the combo to the point where he has that one refined.

I severely dislike the Garchomp thing.

Neither is good for the game. But the Garchomp thing IMO is worse than the Uxie thing.

I feel just the opposite.

Garchomp DCE Gain donks are lame, too, but it's an aspect of the format, it's a method to help give Luxchomp an edge against Jumpluff last season (among other things). Really, how often do you actually see Earthquake or Sableye donks anymore? You have to be running Sablelock to do it, basically.

While I agree that the Uxie Donk is a spectacular display of skill and understanding, the fact that it is possible is where I take issue. The occasional "I started Unown Q and he donked me" is sad, but difficult to avoid; that kind of thing happens. The idea that a deck can be based around preventing others from getting a chance to play the game at all, however...

 

[Rocketman]

I thought I'd share with you guys what I thought were the top issues & problems facing the current format & tournaments. That way, we can brainstorm productive ideas which may eventually become implemented in the form of new rules, procedures, etc.

1) Duration of Tournaments
Over the years, the speed of a Pokemon TCG game as slowed down. What originally used 20 minute time limits per games had to be extended to 30 minutes, then to 40 minutes (and now a similar 30 minutes+3 turns). Let's face it: the game is different than it was in the base set days. And whether or not that's a good thing isn't worth debating because we can't change the cards they print in Japan.

These long games are a problem because they make finishing tournaments in one day difficult. Sure, we can pull off City Championships in a day, but come States & Regionals, these tournaments can easily run past midnight.

What solutions do I have? Well, there's the simple ones, such as reinstating draws. Every tournament, I see games drag into sudden death. The larger the tournament, the more likely a game is to drag in sudden death after time has been called. Reinstating draws would shave a small amount of time off of small tournaments, but could save hours in a tournament like Nationals or Worlds.

Another solution would be hosting tournaments with different formats. I know Japan has 30-card (or is it 40-card?) deck tournaments with 3 or 4 prizes. What about trying that over here? It would give players a chance to play against more opponents too, since you could fit more rounds in a tournament. Sure, I'd rather play 60-card Pokemon, but if we can't allow adequate time for 6 prize games, what's the point? That brings me to my next issue:

2) Match Play
There was recently a change in the Best 2 of 3 procedure that allows the winner of Game 2 to be decided by whoever had drawn less prize cards, regardless of how many prize cards they had drawn. This allows a loser of Game 1 to score a quick one-prize win in Game 2, and possibly the same in a sudden Death Game 3. The winner of Game 1 often feels cheated because he can win a lengthy, legitimate Game 1, and lose the series to a player who only drew a total of two prize cards.

Now, why was the 4-prize requirement lifted? Because players often don't have time to draw 4 prizes in Game 2. So the options are either: leave someone who lost Game 1 feel cheated since they often don't have enough time to draw 4 prizes in Game 2, or leave some Game 1 winners feeling cheated that they won a legitimate game and lost two illegitimate games to lose the whole series. Neither of these solutions were good, and choosing one is simply picking the lesser of two evils. So, let's think outside the box? We either need to have longer tournaments, or have an entirely different format. Any other ideas? That's why I'm posting this. I'd love to hear them.

3) Turn 1 losses
Turn one losses leave people feeling sour, too. They've been around since base, became more rare in the 04-07 era, then returned with cards like Crobat G & PokeTurn in 2008. While almost everyone dislikes the idea of a Turn one loss, whether or not it is an issue that needs "fixing" is up for debate. Is it possible Organized Play can implement a rule that prevents or lessens the odds of a turn one loss? If so, would it be better for the game?

For those of you who do not view it as a problem, try playing against the Rob D's Uxie deck up in Chicago. Fueled by 50 trainers, the deck takes a 13-minute first turn and consistently defeats 3 to 4 Pokemon when he has the option to play second. While not unbeatable (or near it), even decks designed to be good against it can be defeated on Rob's first turn if he plays second.

Curious to hear any ideas, as well as issues I may have missed.

ideas:
1. 30 min time, reinstate draws except the last round of swiss.
2. drop match play. Mtg was designed for match play, not pokemon. And really, the % of matches that go 3 complete games in a hour is less than 50 % ( my guess). Too many powers, trainers, ( see " Rob's deck" above). Could go 1.5 hours as some do, but from what I've seen those tournaments run late. And at a regional, that would push it to t 2nd day.
We did it this way for years and it was fine. Though I wouldn't mind seeing a 1 game, 40 minute top cut. And with my third fix, you wouldn't see donking as easy.
3. Which is no attacking on turn 1 of both players turn. Another thing I'd like to see is a mulgian rule similar to mtg, only to be used once a game. You would still have to muligan for no basics, but you could choose 1 x to muligan even if you had basics. next time you had basics, you would have to play.

 

[Porii Sames]

@Kayle
I don't want to donk my opponent; but I'll do it to win a game.

I really like how informative your post was; but I will disagree on Smeargle not helping the donk factor. THe thing that it does is it uses a POWER to get a Collector instead of an attack. But then again, your opponent has to be holding the Collector which may be unlikely.

Even if Call/Smeargle/Tomb/Dialga isn't a huge benefit to stopping the donk factor, it still helps. Besides; there has to be a cutoff of likely and unlikely. For example, I've never donked a lone SPiritomb(also you just need Crobat G start w/ a Grass and Collector for double bat and Beedrill G but whatever). But hey, them running Spiritomb can commonly stop me from donking them.

 

[Kayle]

@Kayle
I don't want to donk my opponent; but I'll do it to win a game.

So will I, but I will never create a deck sheerly to donk my opponent.

You can't not want to donk when you are playing a deck based on turn one 80-90. Donking is OBVIOUSLY what you want. It is in fact the only way your deck will ever work, if you can pull that much damage out that early - you have no midgame!

I really like how informative your post was; but I will disagree on Smeargle not helping the donk factor. THe thing that it does is it uses a POWER to get a Collector instead of an attack. But then again, your opponent has to be holding the Collector which may be unlikely.

You kind of answered your own question. Sableye is a CONSISTENT consistency card. Early on, you KNOW those collectors are in your deck. It might sacrifice your turn to get it, but you can get it. Smeargle works better after you know they must have certain supporters in their hand (particularly vs SP). I wouldn't use it early unless I was absolutely in the hole, and generally you don't realize just how hosed you are against T1-90.dec until it's far too late.

Even if Call/Smeargle/Tomb/Dialga isn't a huge benefit to stopping the donk factor, it still helps.

"Helps" how? You're not really understanding my point. My point isn't that these things don't do their job very well. I'm saying you are completely off-base in thinking that someone can reliably stop a donk. You're listing off four cards; one of them is, while awesome, not played in as many decks as it once was. One is not a solid early-game play and shouldn't be treated as such. And another is the focal point of one deck in the format - one that is already a very strong play against basically anything, but that doesn't help the format's health any. Only Spiritomb is a decent out against donk strategy, and as I outlined above, the odds you'll start with it are quite poor from a consistency standpoint. Spiritomb isn't even a decent answer to a great deal of solid decks in the format, either - Gyarados can't use it, SP can't use it, Machamp shouldn't use it, so what, you're saying everyone should run Vilegar?? Which, by the way, adheres to the above laws of probability: 40% of your games you will start with it... the rest you won't!

By your logic, donks are legitimate because Vilegar runs Spiritomb. That is basically an indirect conclusion I can draw from your point of view on this, and what you keep bringing up. That isn't even a well-founded point itself. The problem here, the reason we are complaining, is that if people caught on, you could have a "balanced" format that consisted of only donk-style decks and Vilegar. Tournaments would go like this:

A: Vilegar; B: Donk deck. If Vilegar doesn't get Tomb before Donk deck gets trainers (let's say 50% of games: the 40% where you lead with it, and the 10% where you don't lead with it, but go second so you can Collector for it), A loses.
A: Donk; B: Donk. Whoever goes second wins.
A: Vilegar; B: Vilegar. The only remotely normal game of Pokemon that would occur.

So... in about 3 out of 4 games, the game is decided by the second turn???

 

[BigChuck01]

Chuck on Donks:

"Donks" have always, and will always, be part of the game. Remember back in the Base Set days when you would open with an Electabuzz vs a Hitmonchan only to see them Oak 5 times and KO you with 3 Plus Powers? Remember in the Gym days when they would get an Erika's Jigglypuff turn 1 and KO you with a DCE? Remember in the Neo days when youd open Cleffa vs Tyrogue just to see them flip two heads? None of this stuff is new, yet it's getting more complaints than ever, which doesn't make sense to me.

While getting "donked" isn't fun, it's something that cannot be prevented, no matter what new rules would be implemented to remove it. Its always going to be possible to open Garchomp vs Ambipom or Unown Q vs Uxie, etc. Even with a mulligan rule your odds of not getting turn 1ed wont increase by that much (it's very difficult to draw 2 basics in your opening hand, especially two that you're willing to play [obv if you draw Garchomp and Uxie in your opening hand you don't bench the Uxie].

My favorite part of this is all of the complaining about the Uxie deck. Really? You mean the deck thats never won a tournament anywhere, ever? Has States, Regionals, Nationals, or Worlds ever been won by a deck like this? No, their luck eventually runs out at some point and the same good players with the same good decks. Sure, it's absolutely annoying as all hell to watch Rob sit there for 20 mins going through his deck and eventually donking you, but it falls under the same category as every other gimmick strategy throughout history thats unique and annoying, but ends up just being a worse idea in the end. When I see a few tournament reports of Uxie.dec beating SP in the finals, I'll be more open to the idea of these kind of decks actually mattering.

If I had to suggest a way to fix this "problem", I would say that the player going 2nd can only play supporters, not trainers. By allowing him supporters and not trainers, he can still use his Pokemon Collector to avoid getting benched out, but he can't go Crobat turn turn turn junkarm turn uxie turn junkarm etc. By allowing both players to play a supporter before the goofy turns and gains and junk arms come into play, there should be a lot less turn 1 wins.

Chuck on how to improve Pokemon Tournaments:

Call up Jimmy Ballard and get directions from him what to do. This guy gets in more rounds with less nonsense than anyone I know. This is the first time in my life where I'm getting out of CCs when theres still light outside. Here's how Jimmy rolls:

1. Starts the tournament when he says its going to be started. No 10am start that ends up going off at noon.
2. No lunch break during the swiss rounds. Come on now, do you really need to eat every 3 hours? Bring a snack.
3. No nonsense raffles after every round. Save that stuff for before the tournament or after the tournament. There's no worse feeling than when your opponent wins a Jigglypuff hat while you look at your opening hand of 6 trainers and face down Unown Q just waiting to get turn 1ed.
4. His computers actually work. Get out there and upgrade your Pentium 1s so we dont have to sit there while you type every result into MS DOS.

 

[Ness]

Yeah, I'll give props to Jimmy for running CCs well. The lunchbreak/dinner break should be after the swiss rounds are completed. Afterall, you need some time to deck check anyway. I absolutely despise door prizes and the raffles that waste time inbetween rounds. That's a separate thread, though.

Regarding donks, they indeed have always been a part of the game, and my opinion is that it ultimately relies on Japan to stop printing cards designed to turn one people. It's a bad experience for anyone to get turn oned. it's also extremely discouraging to new players.

 

[NoPoke]

Donks are good for the game. Nothing is more encouraging for a new player than winning against a better player. Even if you disagree with that statement donks have always been a part of pokemon tcg and it seems inconceivable that they will ever go away.

But even if donks are good for new players that does not mean that you want a lot of donks in the format or a tournament structure that emphasises donks. The game does need to slow down so that there are fewer turn one losses. T1 losses should be rare. Slowing the game down doesn't fix the donk problem it hides it: if the game slows down for both players then I got donked T1 changes into I drew nothing for three turns and lost instead.. Your turn three loss in a slower environment still isn't an indicator of relative skill but it does feel less painful.

Ultimately the problem isn't turn one donks but our tournament structure where a small number of games are used to decide who advances into the cut.

I disagree with Porii's assertion that you can counter donks. You can't without also giving up any hope of making the cut. The counter for donks has to come from how our tournaments are organised. Has to come from making the influence of donk wins and losses on who makes the cut less than at present. The swiss rounds are not single elimination yet with donks and luck it often feels like they are. You are going to get a bad hand and lose just due to luck, add a donk loss to that and you wont make the cut even if you are the best player in the world. That particular combination which frustrates competative players so much needs to be less frequent than it is at present. The fix won't come from changes to the cards, it could come from changes to the rules for example benching no longer resulting in an immediate loss, though I don't expect that change. So the only practical opportunity to address the issue is through the tournament structure.

The tournament structure is at the heart of all the problems we have. Fortunately it is also the one aspect that we can change.

 

[Scipio]

The problem isnt donks in its own...because as Chuck said, theres the opening matchup thing. I remember people running UF Gligar and Strength Charm to be able to donk Holon's Castform.
However, these donks are situational and meta-based. If you play Electabuzz, you know Hitmonchan can donk you. If you run Cleffa, you know Tyrogue can donk you. If you run Holon's Castform, you know Riolu can donk you.
However, those weren't deck-based donks, they were matchup-based donks.
Suppose I start with Roselia UL. I can donk any poke - by virtue of a triple coin flip. It'll happen.

However, up until LA, it was pretty much impossible to make a deck FOCUSSED 100% ON DONKING. That set brought Kingdra, who could donk pretty well, and Uxie, the ultimate donk assistant. Then we got Machamp and all broke loose.

That's the major issue now - how easy it is to make a deck that focusses on donking. I'm talking about Kingdra, Machamp, Shuppet, Uxie, Jumpluff, Donphan...you name it. The way these decks can be built nowadays are bad for the game.

Suppose we go to RR-On with the new BW rules. Donk DECKS will be made nigh impossible, since it'll be impossible to instantly get a stage 1/2 on the field, and the basics with the highest 1-energy output (or 2, DCE and all) don't regulary go above 20/30 damage. This will mean that the only donks occuring will be with stuff like...Ambipom G...or Garchomp C vs white-weak basics...stuff like that. It still keeps some donking options open but it will eliminate decks that are built to do nothing but donk.

 

[EvanBaker]

My solution to stop donks is a simple rule change that would read like this:

"At any time during a player's first turn, if a player has only one basic Pokemon in play, that player may end his or her turn. If he or she does, that player may search his or her deck for a basic Pokemon and put it onto the bench. That player shuffles his or her deck afterward."

Doesn't stop Sableye or Ambipom donks where you don't ever get to take a turn, but those are far more rare than the usual T2 donks like Garchomp/DCE/EGain or Crobat/Poketurn shenanigans. This seems like a well-rounded rule change. It penalizes the player who chooses this option by not allowing them to attack, and it doesn't step on Call Energy's toes as you can only get 1 Pokemon and can only use this effect if you have only 1 basic in play.