Pokémon TCG: Sword and Shield—Brilliant Stars

People keep asking me to...

No, it didn't. We're good. :thumb:

Seriously, RA, what are your feelings on this? It's for your benefit after all, so what is your decision about whether or not you'll start the team?
 
Well, I've never been a part of a team. So, I wanted to hear about the benefit of teams from former/current team member's perspectives.

The way I see it, there are TWO kinds of teams:

1. iNet teams - These people communicate strictly via Internet. They have message board and chat discussions. Playtesting occurs via RedShark and/or Apprentice.

PROS - I think you can create a more diverse array of players from around the world. Communicating electronically removes restrictions of time and distance. This means a team member can have a great idea at 3 a.m. and share it via message board post; the others can read, ponder, and interject at their own leisure. I feel this can conjure an almost toxic level of highly creative ideas; there is such a diverse population working on a shared idea that are very different in approach, rationale, and strategy tendencies.

CONS - It is not founded on friendship. It seems that the following side-effects are more possible under this model:

  • Lack of cooperation from some members
  • Lack of Loyalty to the team
  • Non-commitment to the task - (virtual deck construction)
  • Members who leech from others and do not contribute to the team's efforts.

2. "Real Life" (brick-n-mortar) teams - These players gather, share, and test in person. They share cards and usually consist of members who are friends.

CONS - Lack of perspective. Sometimes, a small group of friends develops a single idea, becomes overly-commited and becomes married to an idea. Sometimes good friends think alike; this detracts from alternative approaches and lacks perspective.

PROS - FOCUS! Being face-to-face and working together on an idea can lead to some extremely tight and polished lists that completely negate/overwhelm the metagame.
 
Actually IMHO teams work best if they incorporate BOTH approaches. There are several ways to make that happen but the way I like the best is for a team to have a few local members you trust locally and several other small groups and individuals in the larger “iTeam.”

Another thing to keep in mind is that there are downsides to being on a team.
  • It’s harder to just post random ideas on free forums like the Gym, as that can be detrimental to your team or you might give away other folks work.
  • Some team members might not like other team members and you might have to deal with managing group/personality issues. More likely on a bigger iTeam.
  • Teams have reps and it’s something that you can’t fully control. I’m still at a loss to fully comprehend Afs’ designation of Team Hatter as “elitist” for instance.

Overall I think that all players benefit from collaboration and the opportunity to practice and share ideas. You don’t have to be a member of a team, or run one, to make that happen ... but it can make things easier.
 
I agree. You don't have to be a member of a team to be succesful. All you need is the support of good friends. As long as I do well in tournaments and I'm having fun, that's all I need.
 
Rogue Archetype said:
Well, I've never been a part of a team. So, I wanted to hear about the benefit of teams from former/current team member's perspectives.

The way I see it, there are TWO kinds of teams:

1. iNet teams - These people communicate strictly via Internet. They have message board and chat discussions. Playtesting occurs via RedShark and/or Apprentice.

PROS - I think you can create a more diverse array of players from around the world. Communicating electronically removes restrictions of time and distance. This means a team member can have a great idea at 3 a.m. and share it via message board post; the others can read, ponder, and interject at their own leisure. I feel this can conjure an almost toxic level of highly creative ideas; there is such a diverse population working on a shared idea that are very different in approach, rationale, and strategy tendencies.

CONS - It is not founded on friendship. It seems that the following side-effects are more possible under this model:

  • Lack of cooperation from some members
  • Lack of Loyalty to the team
  • Non-commitment to the task - (virtual deck construction)
  • Members who leech from others and do not contribute to the team's efforts.

2. "Real Life" (brick-n-mortar) teams - These players gather, share, and test in person. They share cards and usually consist of members who are friends.

CONS - Lack of perspective. Sometimes, a small group of friends develops a single idea, becomes overly-commited and becomes married to an idea. Sometimes good friends think alike; this detracts from alternative approaches and lacks perspective.

PROS - FOCUS! Being face-to-face and working together on an idea can lead to some extremely tight and polished lists that completely negate/overwhelm the metagame.
Click to expand...

My team consists of someone from Michigan, Buenos Aires, Norway, New York, Philadelphia, Memphis, and 2 others from Florida (whom I love with in Tallahassee). 9 members, from all over the world.

All of these people I met through Pokemon, but I've roomed with all but 2 at events, and think of the other two as extremely close and brotherly. I would trust them in my hotel room, and I would trust them with my list. Do you really think any board or discussion area will be immune from leak if its members have any amount of disloyalty?

There is only one thing that can allow a team to last the test of time- trust. Teams that last more than a few years are built on an incredible amount of trust. Being close to one another has nothing to do with it. It's about having someone on your team who can be trusted.

What good is it to break a new deck or metagame if the information is not confidential? The entire purpose of the forum is to create a new deck- why a new deck? so it can go into a metagame unfamiliar to it and perform well in it. Having it leaked undermines the purpose of creating a new deck, and thus any forum that has any degree of mistrust is completely undermined and doomed to fail.

What extents one will go to in order to preserve trust is different. We have a very very very strict policy- if someone on my team discusses the deck or list with anyone not on the team, they are immediately and permanently removed. Many members come and go, but you keep a few gems whom you can trust and actually work with.

Large groups of people are usually unnecessary and counterproductive. Lists will evolve and change too quickly, there will be too many variants and changes, there will be different tugs of ideas and pulling of direction and change, and of course the issue of security. With every member added, the potential for leaking increases.


However, although I have a team, I love to work with other people for ideas. The number of people I discuss lists with is somewhat small, maybe 25 often, and 50 in general. I'll talk decks with anyone, but I prefer to go to other friends I have. Having a good network of many people whom you can test with is good for general matchups and just because it's fun. I have 96 pokemon players' screen names that I've accumulated. I could play any of these people at any given time. I would only play my SD with 8 of them though.
 
wow, i knew teams existed but i didn't know they were this extensive, i just play with my league friends and i guess if i had a team, it would be one of my best friends and my brother. :) haha
can someone message me with more info on what exactly would qualify as a team? but until then, i'll just stick to my small town ways hopefully i can meet ya'll and we can be friends
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top