Issues Facing the TCG
- Thread starter Ness
- Start date
- Status
And this is a bad thing??? I CAN'T WAIT!!!
Building metagame decks became so much more difficult with the loss of the X2 weakness. 4 corners and Eevees were two of the best ones I had that took advantage of an opps weakness. I am looking forward to this change overall....
Jimmy
On the other hand, +X weakness made mono-type decks a lot more playable, since you wouldn't auto-lose to an opponent that hit you for weakness. A deck like Charizard AR doesn't function well with x2 weakness.
But on a third hand, at least your counter needs to do 70 damage before weakness to finish of most Stage 2s, and that's generally an attack for two typed energies and a colorless. So...I'm not sure.
But on a third hand, at least your counter needs to do 70 damage before weakness to finish of most Stage 2s, and that's generally an attack for two typed energies and a colorless. So...I'm not sure.
Scipio
New Member
Yeah except stuff like Donphan, Kingdra and the likes would like to disagree about that...
Thats the new issue with x2 weakness. Its too easy to hit the 70 damage mark these days.
Parco Folgore
New Member
I don't have enough time to read all the posts here, unfortunately, so I'm not sure if this has been said.
But, I really like this game, and I know a lot of people like this game. People will more than likely continue to play it, and when it does meet its end, someone will make something similar.
But, I really like this game, and I know a lot of people like this game. People will more than likely continue to play it, and when it does meet its end, someone will make something similar.
Jimmy, you sound like you have a good system and many TO's do. Many also don't, I have played in tournaments where door prizes take forever, the in- between rounds drag on and food breaks seem to be a trip kill the cow.
Really, the key is in between rounds. The rounds are gonna be 30 minutes, and if you keep on the +3, remembering that the time limit actions for those turns remain the same as in the timed part of the round, really thats all a TO can control.
As far as turn 1 KO's....personally I'm ok with it, because I DON"T want pokemon to be like mtg any more than is has become. But if you take away turn 1 attacks ( i.e. summoning sickness) and allow mtg style mulligans you'd not have T-1 ko's.
Does PCL want T-1 ko's? Well, saybleye pretty much says it, doesn't it. When you design a card that encourages that, then I'd say it's a safe bet they wanted it.
Really, the key is in between rounds. The rounds are gonna be 30 minutes, and if you keep on the +3, remembering that the time limit actions for those turns remain the same as in the timed part of the round, really thats all a TO can control.
As far as turn 1 KO's....personally I'm ok with it, because I DON"T want pokemon to be like mtg any more than is has become. But if you take away turn 1 attacks ( i.e. summoning sickness) and allow mtg style mulligans you'd not have T-1 ko's.
Does PCL want T-1 ko's? Well, saybleye pretty much says it, doesn't it. When you design a card that encourages that, then I'd say it's a safe bet they wanted it.
Didn't have time to read all 7 pages, but here's my opinion:
The solution to all 3 problems is separating tournaments into 2 days (or 3 for Nats/Worlds).
To explain, problem #1 is the duration of the tournament going on past midnight. Broken up into 2 days, the tournament shouldn't go on into the night when players are becoming tired. This should allow more room for ridiculous sudden death matches or extended games due to rulings.
Problem #2, with the extended duration of the tournament, there should be plenty of time to play out Top Cut matches (Maybe even increasing the time to 1.5 hours?). The entire tournament structure during Top Cut could also be redesigned to incorporate all that extra time, and to host better games.
The idea for problem #3 may be a bit more reaching, but with the extra time perhaps we can do best 3-series matches in Swiss (similar to Top Cut)? It may involve a 30 or 40 card format like Japan, but I think the more games that are played the more accurately we declare a winner.
The solution to all 3 problems is separating tournaments into 2 days (or 3 for Nats/Worlds).
To explain, problem #1 is the duration of the tournament going on past midnight. Broken up into 2 days, the tournament shouldn't go on into the night when players are becoming tired. This should allow more room for ridiculous sudden death matches or extended games due to rulings.
Problem #2, with the extended duration of the tournament, there should be plenty of time to play out Top Cut matches (Maybe even increasing the time to 1.5 hours?). The entire tournament structure during Top Cut could also be redesigned to incorporate all that extra time, and to host better games.
The idea for problem #3 may be a bit more reaching, but with the extra time perhaps we can do best 3-series matches in Swiss (similar to Top Cut)? It may involve a 30 or 40 card format like Japan, but I think the more games that are played the more accurately we declare a winner.
Naki Feralkin
New Member
On Sableye: He wasn't always to be considered a T1 Donk card, was he? I mean, I understand his body/attack say otherwise, but originally when SF was released you really didn't ever see any Sableye based donk decks, especially with Dusknoir (Dark weak), and Kingdra (Horsea = Low HP) running the format upon SF's release. The donk factor didn't come until around GA Marathon last year. I mean I think there might have been some Sableye lists upon release, but seeing them in abundance during Cities/States/Regis/Nationals was not common at all, even after the release of PT/RR, nor did you see like.. any in Top Cuts or winning whole tournaments.
Coming from a player who indeed did play a lot of Machamp (upon its release, at least), and Sablelock, I can also attest that while donking is a very notable part of the game.. it really isn't that fun at all. I do feel very often like when I won a game with it, I kind of didn't even give my opponent a chance, and being a league leader/professor, I feel that takes away from what this game stands for. Don't get me wrong. I like winning, and when I chose those decks, I chose them due to the metagame, not because I decided: "Oh, lets go out and donk and win the game hurp". I agree completely that it is used for those people who are newer to the game and they want a taste of victory since.. its true, they really don't have a whole lot of skill just yet. Honestly, it really isn't insulting to say that. I'm not the best player in the world, nor will I claim to be. I will play these decks to get myself up to top cut if I choose to. At this moment will I? Definitely not. Machamp isn't quite as viable as he could be, and as much as I love my Sablelock, its just not cutting it against Luxchomp. Take that statement with a grain of salt.
Donks are donks. They're a part of the game, no matter who complains about it in the long run. I have donked, I have been donked. Its not a satisfying way to win or lose (Unless you're new and want the wins badly), there are ways to get an early win in almost every game (though Pokemon is the most common), and theres not much that can be done about it. (Riolu Vs. Castform seemed to be pretty common when I began playing this game, as did Rare Candy DRE Infernape dead) There really is not a point in complaining about it.
I also came from M:TG, where 50 minute rounds was typical, and match play was also around. I don't know if that would actually work for this game though. I judged a CC a couple weeks back and I can tell you a ton of games went to time and fully utilised the +3. A single match (Plus sideboarding and shuffling) of M:TG can finish 3 games in like 35-40 minutes unless you're playing some ridiculous cleric/stall deck. (Saw someone do that during Ravnica block. Prevented damage to the time limit then pulled out an angel and wiped his opponent every game..which was a little disgusting to me, but what can you do.)
On the Power Creep: The power creep lately has totally died down. I haven't seen a solid awesome set with bomb cards akin to Luxray GL/Garchomp C in a long time. Some of these sets definitely have had their fair share of good cards that are playable (Jumpluff, Junk Arm, Seeker, Twins), but they're either trumped massively by SP's, used by SP's, or got nerfed due to lack of other good cards (Claydol lol) Honestly, I'd rather see a solid set come around in which a large majority of the cards in the set are somewhat useful and you don't feel gypped when you see a useless vanilla Minun rare in your pack with no trainers to make your 3.50 spent appealing.
While you speak truth on some of this, I've seen a number of cards in this set that could become playable quickly. Zoroark being capable of copying powerful cards attacks for no cost, Jalorda with stackable healing, a Fire Rain Dancer, and a Stage 1 Jumpluff bring some inevitable healthiness to this game. With the possibility (I'm hoping) of Platinum rotating out and all of the SP trainers with it, I'm actually more confident that the TCG can continue its player base and be ready for the wave of additional players brought into it by this already high selling VG.
Besides, wasn't DP pretty meh at first until people saw what could be done with Ape/Tort/Empoleon?
I agree with much said in this thread, but I'm also confident that this game will continue to grow.
Coming from a player who indeed did play a lot of Machamp (upon its release, at least), and Sablelock, I can also attest that while donking is a very notable part of the game.. it really isn't that fun at all. I do feel very often like when I won a game with it, I kind of didn't even give my opponent a chance, and being a league leader/professor, I feel that takes away from what this game stands for. Don't get me wrong. I like winning, and when I chose those decks, I chose them due to the metagame, not because I decided: "Oh, lets go out and donk and win the game hurp". I agree completely that it is used for those people who are newer to the game and they want a taste of victory since.. its true, they really don't have a whole lot of skill just yet. Honestly, it really isn't insulting to say that. I'm not the best player in the world, nor will I claim to be. I will play these decks to get myself up to top cut if I choose to. At this moment will I? Definitely not. Machamp isn't quite as viable as he could be, and as much as I love my Sablelock, its just not cutting it against Luxchomp. Take that statement with a grain of salt.
Donks are donks. They're a part of the game, no matter who complains about it in the long run. I have donked, I have been donked. Its not a satisfying way to win or lose (Unless you're new and want the wins badly), there are ways to get an early win in almost every game (though Pokemon is the most common), and theres not much that can be done about it. (Riolu Vs. Castform seemed to be pretty common when I began playing this game, as did Rare Candy DRE Infernape dead) There really is not a point in complaining about it.
I also came from M:TG, where 50 minute rounds was typical, and match play was also around. I don't know if that would actually work for this game though. I judged a CC a couple weeks back and I can tell you a ton of games went to time and fully utilised the +3. A single match (Plus sideboarding and shuffling) of M:TG can finish 3 games in like 35-40 minutes unless you're playing some ridiculous cleric/stall deck. (Saw someone do that during Ravnica block. Prevented damage to the time limit then pulled out an angel and wiped his opponent every game..which was a little disgusting to me, but what can you do.)
On the Power Creep: The power creep lately has totally died down. I haven't seen a solid awesome set with bomb cards akin to Luxray GL/Garchomp C in a long time. Some of these sets definitely have had their fair share of good cards that are playable (Jumpluff, Junk Arm, Seeker, Twins), but they're either trumped massively by SP's, used by SP's, or got nerfed due to lack of other good cards (Claydol lol) Honestly, I'd rather see a solid set come around in which a large majority of the cards in the set are somewhat useful and you don't feel gypped when you see a useless vanilla Minun rare in your pack with no trainers to make your 3.50 spent appealing.
While you speak truth on some of this, I've seen a number of cards in this set that could become playable quickly. Zoroark being capable of copying powerful cards attacks for no cost, Jalorda with stackable healing, a Fire Rain Dancer, and a Stage 1 Jumpluff bring some inevitable healthiness to this game. With the possibility (I'm hoping) of Platinum rotating out and all of the SP trainers with it, I'm actually more confident that the TCG can continue its player base and be ready for the wave of additional players brought into it by this already high selling VG.
Besides, wasn't DP pretty meh at first until people saw what could be done with Ape/Tort/Empoleon?
I agree with much said in this thread, but I'm also confident that this game will continue to grow.
Shen-Extending tournaments to two days will double the costs of running them. Cost of rental hall and staff for two days instead of one. I don't see that happening.
bullados
<a href="http://pokegym.net/forums/showthread.php?
Shen - I seriously hope that you're only talking about Regionals-level and higher. I would not be able to run any of my Premier-level events if I had to run them over 2 days. No venue that I can find in my area would allow me to take over their space for two days while still being reasonably affordable and being large enough for the crowds that I expect.
Exactly. Not only would it be costly to the TO, but I can't imagine many players wanting to hang around more than a day for an event smaller than regionals. Players in my area will travel 3 - 5 hours for a smaller tournament, but won't want to spend the extra money on a hotel room/days off work. We have no problem staying a couple of days for tournaments the size of regionals and larger, but anything smaller than that is hard to rationalize.
vanderbilt_grad
New Member
I could see 2 days for both States and Regionals, but that's not the only option.
I think that one of the major improvements that could be made is totally re-doing TOM. Nearly every major event I've been to that's had time issues has either been a) bigger than expected or b) dogged by TOM issues ... and not this does NOT mean computer issues.
Frankly IMHO P!P has treated TOM in a really unprofessional way. I deal with software deployments for a living and have had exposure to all sorts of products from all sorts of vendors. TOM never fails to remind me of the mom-and-pop shop efforts that always end up being a pain in the tail. P!P needs to either outsource TOM to a professional software development firm or they need to build a much stronger interal IT department. They need to explore non-Java options ... Java is great in theory, but it's implementation has never lived up to that. I can't speak for others but I personally always choose a non-Java solution whenever I have an option.
I think that one of the major improvements that could be made is totally re-doing TOM. Nearly every major event I've been to that's had time issues has either been a) bigger than expected or b) dogged by TOM issues ... and not this does NOT mean computer issues.
Frankly IMHO P!P has treated TOM in a really unprofessional way. I deal with software deployments for a living and have had exposure to all sorts of products from all sorts of vendors. TOM never fails to remind me of the mom-and-pop shop efforts that always end up being a pain in the tail. P!P needs to either outsource TOM to a professional software development firm or they need to build a much stronger interal IT department. They need to explore non-Java options ... Java is great in theory, but it's implementation has never lived up to that. I can't speak for others but I personally always choose a non-Java solution whenever I have an option.
SLOW DECK
New Member
Regionals and States s/b one day event only.
The top cut folks are the minority of the attendee's, no need to hold everyone hostage for 2 days.
Just start the event early. Individuals can decide if Hotel accomdations make sense for them. And do everything possible to make sure the start is done on time. I would implement hard rules on being late. First Round lost if you are late, EVEN IF THEY DON'T HAVE EVERYONE IN THE COMPUTER YET. (Seems silly, but in fairness to all involved, you can't delay even a minute.) Waiting 1 minute to get one person into the computer really means 100 people have to wait 1 minute, thus = 1 hour and 40 minutes taken collectively from everyone at the event. BE ON TIME, and if you can't BE ON TIME....... THEN BE EARLY.
The top cut folks are the minority of the attendee's, no need to hold everyone hostage for 2 days.
Just start the event early. Individuals can decide if Hotel accomdations make sense for them. And do everything possible to make sure the start is done on time. I would implement hard rules on being late. First Round lost if you are late, EVEN IF THEY DON'T HAVE EVERYONE IN THE COMPUTER YET. (Seems silly, but in fairness to all involved, you can't delay even a minute.) Waiting 1 minute to get one person into the computer really means 100 people have to wait 1 minute, thus = 1 hour and 40 minutes taken collectively from everyone at the event. BE ON TIME, and if you can't BE ON TIME....... THEN BE EARLY.
ChaosJim
Member
No, I'm not testing the upper character limit.
The problems with timed top cut:
60+3 for 3 games, instead of 30+3 for one game
Top cut games feature the best players, playing the most complex decks, with the toughest decisions, for the highest stakes. They are also probably the most in practice players which helps to offset the amount of time they take to make decisions, but not by a drastic amount. Even if none of their games would go to time in a standard situation (30+3) and each game took just shy of 30 minutes, plus shuffling between games 1 and 2, game 3 is basically sudden death with 6 prizes, plus 3 turns. However, if game 1 would’ve gone into +3 during Swiss, instead it now goes to 40 minutes (last season’s time limit). Game 2 ends half completed, plus 3 turns.
The above is clearly only a possibility and not a guarantee. How often will it happen though? I’d argue with a top 8 cut you’re overwhelmingly likely to have at least one match go to time in 60+3. There are 7 opportunities for this during the duration of the cut (T8). When we move to States, there are now 15 chances for this to happen (T16), and 33 chances at Regionals (T32). A large number of the judges, PTOs, and players would rather the games decide the results, and as we go to more competitive events with higher stakes, the games are less likely to decide the results of the entire event.
I’m always one to suggest that people have solutions when they believe there is a problem, and I’ll give it my best shot.
Give time extensions for matches that go past game 1. Two minutes to randomize your deck and your opponent’s seems fair. Makes sure no one feels rushed, requires a little bit more from judges, but generates a much better feeling for players.
Have TOM bracket it out. If the winner of game 1 needs to play the winner of game 4, there is no reason for them to wait until 2 is ready to play 3. Sure, potentially things take just as long as when this doesn’t happen, but we also risk getting to go home early when 1 vs. 4 goes to time but 2 vs. 3 ends quickly despite starting later. Maybe TOM already does this, but it hasn’t *seemed* like that from how my local organizers have been running things.
If bracketing it out means we get to go home faster on average, top cut time limits might be able to be extended with less of an effect on the overall length of the event.
On the idea that best of 3 doesn’t intend for 3 games:
Bad. In other games, it does. I fail to see why Pokémon is an exception.
On the lack of different formats:
Bad. It creates barriers to entry, but no worse than the current modified. The idea that
On how to shorten or eliminate lunch breaks:
This is a minor issue, but I’ve been to 3 awesome events this season without lunch breaks. There were places nearby to run and grab something if a game ended early (read: good venue choice), and sufficient time between Swiss and top cut if you somehow didn’t finish one of your 5 or 6 games early. This doesn’t always work for juniors and seniors. One of these venues, the PTO had ticketed pizza. So the parent could buy X slices of pizza beforehand, give their child X tickets to turn into pizza later, and we make sure that children can get something to eat even if their parents/siblings/guardians are stuck playing or actively judging. If we can trust them to not lose their deck, we can trust them with these tickets. These solutions won’t work for everyone, and I hope they work for someone. I’m not interested in an attitude of ‘this solution doesn’t work for me, it is a bad solution’ that I see too often in my lurking. If you can improve on these solutions for different situations, thanks, I hope I can pass it on to some of my PTO friends.
On Donks:
From playing other games, they were interested in preventing NPEs: Negative Play Experiences. A donk is one example, but it was really anything that made someone feel helpless. If there was some deck that I couldn’t beat, under any circumstances, without copying it or playing Dialga G Level X, that would be a problem that is generating NPEs. I’m talking about situations where despite having turns and drawing cards, you shouldn’t bother, because there is 0 possibility of you doing anything. Something along the lines of Blaziken/Sableye with a perfect draw every game, and 2 heads on initiative, and they can Chatot G you forever. NPEs and donks are one of the few player issues that so widely encompasses all 3 age divisions. With the new black and white rules we’ll probably see less of this, especially given the rotation. I can’t fault people for playing the deck they can perform best with however, even if it ruins the experience of tournaments for others. It is no more selfish than my choice to play the best deck I possibly could for any given event, but the consequence is worse for others. Especially if a donk player were to beat a skilled player only to lose the rest of their games and ruin the skilled player’s resistance. Don’t expect the rulebook to change. Serious POP question: do player issues like this get discussed with Japan at all? If so, I’d be curious what kind of player issues the Japanese have had but more importantly, overcome.
Moaning over 2 day events:
Magic can make this work. They’re very serious about their OP. If it needs to happen for the good of the game, it should happen. This conversation shouldn’t be constant complaints about why it can’t work now, but how we bridge the gap to making it work. One thing is combining with the VGC events. I’ve said this before, but costs shouldn’t DIRECTLY double. You don’t need the same size space for T32 in each age division where you previously had over 250 people.
IDs:
If someone else is determining whether or not you make top cut, better luck next time. If my opponent beats me in the last round of Swiss after a close match, and I get upset about how they kept me out of top cut, my friends would be sympathetic but strangers would just see it as part of competition. Everyone sees IDs as this evil abusive thing. If I was 6-0 at worlds going into the final round, I could ID to make cut. Doing so would mean I probably wouldn’t be 1st seed, meaning I lose out on getting to play the worst player to make cut. I lose out on distancing myself as far as possible from the 2nd seed. Does a player 4-2 paired up to a 5-1 in the last round deserve the chance to cash in on their luck an go 4-2-1 (better than 4-3)? I don’t see why not.
Sorry I’m late to this party.
Props to Chuck, Jason, and Jimmy.
Slops to referencing Kingdra as a donk deck, hating on IDs, and all the pro-donk jabber. Beating someone in a way to make them consider playing a different game is terrible for each and everyone of us.
Marg bar haters.
Skilled players will rise again.
The problems with timed top cut:
60+3 for 3 games, instead of 30+3 for one game
Top cut games feature the best players, playing the most complex decks, with the toughest decisions, for the highest stakes. They are also probably the most in practice players which helps to offset the amount of time they take to make decisions, but not by a drastic amount. Even if none of their games would go to time in a standard situation (30+3) and each game took just shy of 30 minutes, plus shuffling between games 1 and 2, game 3 is basically sudden death with 6 prizes, plus 3 turns. However, if game 1 would’ve gone into +3 during Swiss, instead it now goes to 40 minutes (last season’s time limit). Game 2 ends half completed, plus 3 turns.
The above is clearly only a possibility and not a guarantee. How often will it happen though? I’d argue with a top 8 cut you’re overwhelmingly likely to have at least one match go to time in 60+3. There are 7 opportunities for this during the duration of the cut (T8). When we move to States, there are now 15 chances for this to happen (T16), and 33 chances at Regionals (T32). A large number of the judges, PTOs, and players would rather the games decide the results, and as we go to more competitive events with higher stakes, the games are less likely to decide the results of the entire event.
I’m always one to suggest that people have solutions when they believe there is a problem, and I’ll give it my best shot.
Give time extensions for matches that go past game 1. Two minutes to randomize your deck and your opponent’s seems fair. Makes sure no one feels rushed, requires a little bit more from judges, but generates a much better feeling for players.
Have TOM bracket it out. If the winner of game 1 needs to play the winner of game 4, there is no reason for them to wait until 2 is ready to play 3. Sure, potentially things take just as long as when this doesn’t happen, but we also risk getting to go home early when 1 vs. 4 goes to time but 2 vs. 3 ends quickly despite starting later. Maybe TOM already does this, but it hasn’t *seemed* like that from how my local organizers have been running things.
If bracketing it out means we get to go home faster on average, top cut time limits might be able to be extended with less of an effect on the overall length of the event.
On the idea that best of 3 doesn’t intend for 3 games:
Bad. In other games, it does. I fail to see why Pokémon is an exception.
On the lack of different formats:
Bad. It creates barriers to entry, but no worse than the current modified. The idea that
On how to shorten or eliminate lunch breaks:
This is a minor issue, but I’ve been to 3 awesome events this season without lunch breaks. There were places nearby to run and grab something if a game ended early (read: good venue choice), and sufficient time between Swiss and top cut if you somehow didn’t finish one of your 5 or 6 games early. This doesn’t always work for juniors and seniors. One of these venues, the PTO had ticketed pizza. So the parent could buy X slices of pizza beforehand, give their child X tickets to turn into pizza later, and we make sure that children can get something to eat even if their parents/siblings/guardians are stuck playing or actively judging. If we can trust them to not lose their deck, we can trust them with these tickets. These solutions won’t work for everyone, and I hope they work for someone. I’m not interested in an attitude of ‘this solution doesn’t work for me, it is a bad solution’ that I see too often in my lurking. If you can improve on these solutions for different situations, thanks, I hope I can pass it on to some of my PTO friends.
On Donks:
From playing other games, they were interested in preventing NPEs: Negative Play Experiences. A donk is one example, but it was really anything that made someone feel helpless. If there was some deck that I couldn’t beat, under any circumstances, without copying it or playing Dialga G Level X, that would be a problem that is generating NPEs. I’m talking about situations where despite having turns and drawing cards, you shouldn’t bother, because there is 0 possibility of you doing anything. Something along the lines of Blaziken/Sableye with a perfect draw every game, and 2 heads on initiative, and they can Chatot G you forever. NPEs and donks are one of the few player issues that so widely encompasses all 3 age divisions. With the new black and white rules we’ll probably see less of this, especially given the rotation. I can’t fault people for playing the deck they can perform best with however, even if it ruins the experience of tournaments for others. It is no more selfish than my choice to play the best deck I possibly could for any given event, but the consequence is worse for others. Especially if a donk player were to beat a skilled player only to lose the rest of their games and ruin the skilled player’s resistance. Don’t expect the rulebook to change. Serious POP question: do player issues like this get discussed with Japan at all? If so, I’d be curious what kind of player issues the Japanese have had but more importantly, overcome.
Moaning over 2 day events:
Magic can make this work. They’re very serious about their OP. If it needs to happen for the good of the game, it should happen. This conversation shouldn’t be constant complaints about why it can’t work now, but how we bridge the gap to making it work. One thing is combining with the VGC events. I’ve said this before, but costs shouldn’t DIRECTLY double. You don’t need the same size space for T32 in each age division where you previously had over 250 people.
IDs:
If someone else is determining whether or not you make top cut, better luck next time. If my opponent beats me in the last round of Swiss after a close match, and I get upset about how they kept me out of top cut, my friends would be sympathetic but strangers would just see it as part of competition. Everyone sees IDs as this evil abusive thing. If I was 6-0 at worlds going into the final round, I could ID to make cut. Doing so would mean I probably wouldn’t be 1st seed, meaning I lose out on getting to play the worst player to make cut. I lose out on distancing myself as far as possible from the 2nd seed. Does a player 4-2 paired up to a 5-1 in the last round deserve the chance to cash in on their luck an go 4-2-1 (better than 4-3)? I don’t see why not.
Sorry I’m late to this party.
Props to Chuck, Jason, and Jimmy.
Slops to referencing Kingdra as a donk deck, hating on IDs, and all the pro-donk jabber. Beating someone in a way to make them consider playing a different game is terrible for each and everyone of us.
Marg bar haters.
Skilled players will rise again.
bullados
<a href="http://pokegym.net/forums/showthread.php?
Jim, I'll at least try and talk about each point you made as eloquently as I possibly can...
Problems with Timed Top Cut:
I agree. I would like to un-time the shuffling process, and I would like to start games where they can be started. Unfortunately, the former is not currently in the rules, and the tournament software does not allow for the latter to happen organically. It's certainly possible, TOM even prints out a bracket sheet if you want it. But I've only got two timepieces for my event that count down to time and have built-in alarms. Not sure how expensive accurate countdown timers are (I'm not using an egg timer for a top cut match). I don't really see the necessity to do that, but it is an option when time is running short.
B-O-3 not counting...:
Other games don't have the expectation that a single game can last anywhere from a few seconds to well above 30 minutes. I'm certain you remember the old GG format where games would last 30 minutes and a grand total of 3 prizes had been taken. That style of play still exists. IMO, it should be encouraged. Not slow-playing, but the idea of a long, involved, and well-thought-out game. Other games have the built-in expectation that games are quick, sort of pick-up-and-go type of experiences. Pokemon games are more like chess matches. Before you start talking about extending the length of a top cut, remember that not all venues can support such a system. For example, I will be hard-pressed to finish my Cities before my venues close on both days with the 1 hour time limit. And I'm kinda in the middle of nowhere as far as population centers go.
Different formats:
Please finish this! I'd like to hear your thoughts!
Donks:
I agree. This is almost entirely on the game's creators, though international format shifts can play a part. I also like the terminology of Negative Play Experiences, and think that it should replace the far more specific "donk" terminology. That's how I'll be referring to them in the future.
2-day events:
Only for events where the expectation is for large attendances. If you're seriously suggesting that BRs, Cities, and Prereleases should be multiple-day events, I've got a nice chair in a corner for you to sit in.
As far as the larger events, you have to remember that Pokemon is a children's card game and is marketed towards children. Organized Play, tournament support, and everything similar are all marketing ploys to get people to buy the game. I wish there was a more gentile way of putting that, but there really isn't from my perspective. If you are marketing a game towards kids and using a tournament experience to do so, you have to work around a child's schedule. That is, their parents' schedule. The game must not only appeal to the core demographic, but also to those that support the core demographic directly. Two day events do not appeal to parents, because they want to be doing stuff for themselves and don't want to have to spend multiple days of travel to attend an event that they will not enjoy themselves (generally). Nationals is a little bit different insofar as its impressive size would necessitate a longer tournament time. One day proved to be too short. Two days proved to be too short. Three days, currently, is adequate, though with the expansion of the game's player base, it might not be in the future.
As far as Regionals go, they vary in size from area to area. Last year, they ranged from 93 players to 327 players, with an average of 209 players. The average number of rounds was 7 (118 players in Masters), with an average of top 16. Given those averages, the tournament would be expected to last 7 hours for the Swiss rounds (40-50 minutes per round, plus a lunch break), and then an additional 4-5 hours for the top cut. An event starting at 10am would finish around 10pm given no distractions or delays (like computer glitches, etc). It depends largely on the area. I would not begrudge Oregon, California, Florida, etc. if they decided to hold the top cut on a second day. But it could also be possible to hold the entire Jr/Sr tournaments on a single day.
IDs:
I hated going to an event and watching the entire top 4 tables simply get up and leave during the final round, assured they'd make the top cut by NOT PLAYING. It annoyed me even more as I started getting into the Judge and Organizational aspects of the game. Games are meant to be PLAYED, not GAMED. I hated that people could make the top cut by NOT PLAYING. I still hate that. If you were to tell me that draws were allowed, but not for the final quarter of Swiss rounds, I'd be fine with that. Otherwise, no go. IDs only become a problem in the final quarter of Swiss rounds. Before that, they become timesavers. IDs are a game on the system, pure and simple.
Problems with Timed Top Cut:
I agree. I would like to un-time the shuffling process, and I would like to start games where they can be started. Unfortunately, the former is not currently in the rules, and the tournament software does not allow for the latter to happen organically. It's certainly possible, TOM even prints out a bracket sheet if you want it. But I've only got two timepieces for my event that count down to time and have built-in alarms. Not sure how expensive accurate countdown timers are (I'm not using an egg timer for a top cut match). I don't really see the necessity to do that, but it is an option when time is running short.
B-O-3 not counting...:
Other games don't have the expectation that a single game can last anywhere from a few seconds to well above 30 minutes. I'm certain you remember the old GG format where games would last 30 minutes and a grand total of 3 prizes had been taken. That style of play still exists. IMO, it should be encouraged. Not slow-playing, but the idea of a long, involved, and well-thought-out game. Other games have the built-in expectation that games are quick, sort of pick-up-and-go type of experiences. Pokemon games are more like chess matches. Before you start talking about extending the length of a top cut, remember that not all venues can support such a system. For example, I will be hard-pressed to finish my Cities before my venues close on both days with the 1 hour time limit. And I'm kinda in the middle of nowhere as far as population centers go.
Different formats:
Please finish this! I'd like to hear your thoughts!
Donks:
I agree. This is almost entirely on the game's creators, though international format shifts can play a part. I also like the terminology of Negative Play Experiences, and think that it should replace the far more specific "donk" terminology. That's how I'll be referring to them in the future.
2-day events:
Only for events where the expectation is for large attendances. If you're seriously suggesting that BRs, Cities, and Prereleases should be multiple-day events, I've got a nice chair in a corner for you to sit in.
As far as the larger events, you have to remember that Pokemon is a children's card game and is marketed towards children. Organized Play, tournament support, and everything similar are all marketing ploys to get people to buy the game. I wish there was a more gentile way of putting that, but there really isn't from my perspective. If you are marketing a game towards kids and using a tournament experience to do so, you have to work around a child's schedule. That is, their parents' schedule. The game must not only appeal to the core demographic, but also to those that support the core demographic directly. Two day events do not appeal to parents, because they want to be doing stuff for themselves and don't want to have to spend multiple days of travel to attend an event that they will not enjoy themselves (generally). Nationals is a little bit different insofar as its impressive size would necessitate a longer tournament time. One day proved to be too short. Two days proved to be too short. Three days, currently, is adequate, though with the expansion of the game's player base, it might not be in the future.
As far as Regionals go, they vary in size from area to area. Last year, they ranged from 93 players to 327 players, with an average of 209 players. The average number of rounds was 7 (118 players in Masters), with an average of top 16. Given those averages, the tournament would be expected to last 7 hours for the Swiss rounds (40-50 minutes per round, plus a lunch break), and then an additional 4-5 hours for the top cut. An event starting at 10am would finish around 10pm given no distractions or delays (like computer glitches, etc). It depends largely on the area. I would not begrudge Oregon, California, Florida, etc. if they decided to hold the top cut on a second day. But it could also be possible to hold the entire Jr/Sr tournaments on a single day.
IDs:
I hated going to an event and watching the entire top 4 tables simply get up and leave during the final round, assured they'd make the top cut by NOT PLAYING. It annoyed me even more as I started getting into the Judge and Organizational aspects of the game. Games are meant to be PLAYED, not GAMED. I hated that people could make the top cut by NOT PLAYING. I still hate that. If you were to tell me that draws were allowed, but not for the final quarter of Swiss rounds, I'd be fine with that. Otherwise, no go. IDs only become a problem in the final quarter of Swiss rounds. Before that, they become timesavers. IDs are a game on the system, pure and simple.
vanderbilt_grad
New Member
Bullados ... I think that I'm going to start calling you "Dr. No" since that seems to be your function here. "No no no no no...."
:frown:
It's really no fun to read your posts. There's no collaboration or apparent attempt to invest creativity in coming up with solutions. It's aways, "That will never happen."
As for this being a kid's game ... isn't that what WOTC tried to make Pokemon? Didn't they fail?
Don't Masters make up the largest percentage of OP ... by far? Who has money, kids or adults?
And for the record, I'm a parent. I take my kids to events. They got me in the game ... but I couldn't disagree with the statement about working around the parent's schedule more. Parents are always doing things for their kids ... pokemon is easy. Instead of having to go to multiple practices and games a week the way I do for their basketball I just go on weekends when it suits us.
December 4, 2010 - Published start time: 11am, end of swiss (four rounds) just before 4pm
December 12, 2010 - Published start time: noon, end of swiss (four rounds) just after 5pm
I think I'm moving to Rockford.
After thoroughly reading this thread I have to say I'm pleased at the (mature) attention towards donks. Like always, we will have people who label the discussion "whining," but I'm glad to see the other side of it. It absolutely effects the player base.. I've only been to 2 events this year and I'm pretty unmotivated to travel to any more, my last tournament experience was getting donked 3 times (twice by Machamp, once by a Gain'd Luxray and a flurry of Flash Bites). Needless to say, the matches I did play were with inexperienced players. It's a bit of an insult to work on a deck for so long only to be told "too bad, you lost without playing more than 1 turn."
Venting aside, I too blame the huge format. I think an important thing to consider would be how can we make the format small again, without upsetting a bunch of people? The rotation would need to cut out a ton of sets to make up for it. We don't want to go in the complete opposite direction and make a format with only 1 or 2 viable decks, either. I think skipping the rotation and keeping it DP-on a couple seasons back was a big mistake.
Venting aside, I too blame the huge format. I think an important thing to consider would be how can we make the format small again, without upsetting a bunch of people? The rotation would need to cut out a ton of sets to make up for it. We don't want to go in the complete opposite direction and make a format with only 1 or 2 viable decks, either. I think skipping the rotation and keeping it DP-on a couple seasons back was a big mistake.
Scipio
New Member
I don't think its the sheer size of the format. Suppose we cut out MD, LA, PT and SF and re-add DP, MT, SW and GE, the donk issue would largely be gone yet the format size would stay the same.
The real issue is that 90% of all donk cards (and their co-culprints) reside in LA, PT and SF.
The real issue is that 90% of all donk cards (and their co-culprints) reside in LA, PT and SF.
- Status