Pokemon Catcher
- Thread starter Bigbowlr1037
- Start date
- Status
Swordfish1989
New Member
Thank you. To quote Mean Girls... 'Stop trying to make XY-on happen. It's not gonna happen.'
Why? Because they have never done a rotation which only left us with 3(!!) legal sets. Even their hard mid-season rotation to HGSS-on left us 6 sets to start the season with. It's WAY too drastic.
Bigbowlr1037
New Member
Catcher is also in the theme decks.
Maverick Nate
New Member
Only one and only in the Volcarona theme deck.
You only get 1 in the theme deck. It's still gonna be probably $8ish at the lowest, unless its print run in the set is WAY too high.
Otaku
Active Member
Since it is still a part of this discussion:
Pokémon Catcher is not broken. You pay your Item to do one thing; shift your opponent's Pokémon around.
But Otaku, it wins games!
Well voice-inside-my-head, it contributes to wins, but it can't ever win you the game on its own; its always just setting up for something else be it a brute force assault, comboing with an effect (including triggering certain draw backs - see Fossil Ditto), or even just stranding something in the Active slot for stalling. If any of these become abusive, I don't blame Pokémon Catcher... because it is such a simple, fundamental mechanic (forcing up something from the Bench) and almost everything that it "causes a problem with" also causes problems on its own (be a bit different if that last bit weren't true).
I'll resist commenting on some other things that just don't line up with my observations and deductions about this game in the hopes that my only mildly long comment is actually well read. If that sounds snide... no really, I know I make "wall o' text" comments that are a pain to read and can obfuscate my own points. >_<
Pokémon Catcher is not broken. You pay your Item to do one thing; shift your opponent's Pokémon around.
But Otaku, it wins games!
Well voice-inside-my-head, it contributes to wins, but it can't ever win you the game on its own; its always just setting up for something else be it a brute force assault, comboing with an effect (including triggering certain draw backs - see Fossil Ditto), or even just stranding something in the Active slot for stalling. If any of these become abusive, I don't blame Pokémon Catcher... because it is such a simple, fundamental mechanic (forcing up something from the Bench) and almost everything that it "causes a problem with" also causes problems on its own (be a bit different if that last bit weren't true).
I'll resist commenting on some other things that just don't line up with my observations and deductions about this game in the hopes that my only mildly long comment is actually well read. If that sounds snide... no really, I know I make "wall o' text" comments that are a pain to read and can obfuscate my own points. >_<
Pandemonium
New Member
My girlfriend and I opened 30 packs total today and pulled 8 catchers, two of them being reverse holo. They were everywhere at our pre release. :X Obviously that could be dumb luck of course though! Just posting it for reference or whatever
Sent from my Galaxy Note 2 using Tapatalk 2
Agreed! ^
Catchers were just everywhereeeeee.
I myself towards the end of the event pulled 1 reg and 1 reverse.
So pleased.
Idc what anyone says who keeps trying to keep its value high cause they're depressed at the reality.
It'll be a $5 dollar card (top item card) reverse $8-$10.
Catchers were just everywhereeeeee.
I myself towards the end of the event pulled 1 reg and 1 reverse.
So pleased.
Idc what anyone says who keeps trying to keep its value high cause they're depressed at the reality.
It'll be a $5 dollar card (top item card) reverse $8-$10.
pokemonrocks777
Front Page News Editor
I think that value will drop way to no more than $7 or $8. the reason is I saw somewhere it is in a starter deck.
Poke Trainer J
New Member
God forbid If we end up getting Big Basic EX's for Xerneas and Yveltal in XY block. Big Basic EX's were just horrible game design that should've never existed but yet they did as SP's when the Platinum series was still Modified legal. Remember LuxChomp a few years ago? That didn't go too well but yet we had a much more playable card pool back then than we do right now.
Hmm... double negative... tricky, tricky.
Otaku
Active Member
Hard to tell if serious... at least the whole way through. The last comment, for example, seems fairly straightforward. For the record, yes it could just be me; didn't sleep well. :lol:
Still, it lets me address another "modern myth" of the Pokémon TCG: that "big Basic" Pokémon in general and Pokémon-EX in particular are bad for the game. This just isn't accurate. Oh, several of the Pokémon-EX (and non-EX big, Basic Pokémon-EX) are definitely overpowered, but it is from specific design decisions.
Again, trying to watch myself for length, so while I am leaving a lot unsaid, the idea of representing the often overpowered Legendary Pokémon of the video games as powerful cards in the TCG that have an extra "cost" to them is acceptable, and possibly needed. The implementation messed up in two areas:
1) Too fast - such cards get access to high HP, potent attacks and Abilities... but you can't get them access to all of that first turn! They already enjoy the inherent benefits of being a Basic Pokémon; despite saving card space they shouldn't truly be that much faster at reaching the "potential" of Evolved Pokémon.
2) Too much filler - Evolving Basic Pokémon are foundational (literally) for Evolutions. They need to do something other than being a stepping stone. Let them be useful for setting up or early game disruption. Stage 1 Pokémon need to be a little of that and/or "spare, lower quality version of Stage 2" (as appropriate).
Do those things, and decks utilizing just big, Basic Pokémon or focusing on Evolutions or even running a combination of the two can balance out; Basics take less space (allowing for more Trainers) but still need a few turns to get going, while Evolutions need a few turns to get going but the Basics they Evolve from are all useful ASAP (in terms of setting up).
I get the reasoning of the EXs. In the past, legendary Pokemon have been weak, when you consider they are very strong in the video games and almost god-like in the cartoon. These EXs are very strong and fair to the idea of legendary Pokemon, but the way they are implemented is poisonous for the health of the game. And I'm not sure they could be implemented in any other way.
Unlike MTG or other card games, Pokemon don't have costs. The only psuedo-cost is evolution. Unfortunately, none of the legendary Pokemon are evolutions, so they can be in play on turn 1. It's like when Ash's opponent summons Latias. It's just not fair to any other non-EX in the format. It's not a balanced play field when a player can get out a 180HP EX on turn 1 and possibly even attack.
So there is an inherit problem with the game representing these strong Legendary Pokemon. They either come out too weak, as is the case of many of the non super rare versions of them, or they come out too strong, which is the case for many of the current EXs.
Unlike MTG or other card games, Pokemon don't have costs. The only psuedo-cost is evolution. Unfortunately, none of the legendary Pokemon are evolutions, so they can be in play on turn 1. It's like when Ash's opponent summons Latias. It's just not fair to any other non-EX in the format. It's not a balanced play field when a player can get out a 180HP EX on turn 1 and possibly even attack.
So there is an inherit problem with the game representing these strong Legendary Pokemon. They either come out too weak, as is the case of many of the non super rare versions of them, or they come out too strong, which is the case for many of the current EXs.
Otaku
Active Member
Prime (or anyone with a similar analysis to his), I am going to ask that you read my post in its entirety, despite its length. I've tried not to go into my usual excess, but there is a definite break in communication. If you believe you are answering and countering my analysis... I just don't see it. Instead it comes across as either not reading it or not comprehending what I am saying. I don't want to spread false hope, so please take time to answer clearly, even if you feel like you have to talk down to me or be overly detailed.
Several of the Pokémon-EX are not (or are no longer) successfully played competitively: most Pokémon-EX are "average" or worse. So what do the "best" Pokémon-EX, the ones that seem "broken", have in common?
1) Inexpensive attack (relative to available Energy acceleration) they can access by that player's second turn at the latest.
2) Great Ability that can be accessed simply by dropping it into play.
3) Both 1 and 2!
You forgot about Energy costs to attack.
Such a cost may seem like a joke but that's because it is the main problem. It has almost always been a problem, just less of one in some formats. Big basic Pokémon (whether Pokémon-EX or plain) should not have damaging attacks available for a player's first turn, and probably not for the second; at most allow them a token filler attack. Abilities need to be handled similarly - if it generates fast advantage, it probably needs to be restricted to a Pokémon with some set-up or other cost involved.
Why? Because then it takes time to build them!
My analysis is that most of this comes from the execution itself. Yes, hindsight is 20-20 and it is easy to play armchair [DEL]quarterback[/DEL] card designer. There is also the other historical flaw; Evolutions tend to be best because
1) They are arbitrarily beefed up to compensate for being slower e.g. stronger attacks and more HP. Instead they are the ones that can afford to have the inexpensive-but-good Abilities and attacks, because they aren't hitting the field first turn.
2) Evolution acceleration - we've seen several formats like this. I won't deny that they may be amongst the best in the game, but they still would have been better with appropriate balance. Generic Evolution acceleration is a terrible idea; if it isn't "pre-nerfed" such acceleration becomes broken.
Several of the Pokémon-EX are not (or are no longer) successfully played competitively: most Pokémon-EX are "average" or worse. So what do the "best" Pokémon-EX, the ones that seem "broken", have in common?
1) Inexpensive attack (relative to available Energy acceleration) they can access by that player's second turn at the latest.
2) Great Ability that can be accessed simply by dropping it into play.
3) Both 1 and 2!
You forgot about Energy costs to attack.
Such a cost may seem like a joke but that's because it is the main problem. It has almost always been a problem, just less of one in some formats. Big basic Pokémon (whether Pokémon-EX or plain) should not have damaging attacks available for a player's first turn, and probably not for the second; at most allow them a token filler attack. Abilities need to be handled similarly - if it generates fast advantage, it probably needs to be restricted to a Pokémon with some set-up or other cost involved.
Why? Because then it takes time to build them!
My analysis is that most of this comes from the execution itself. Yes, hindsight is 20-20 and it is easy to play armchair [DEL]quarterback[/DEL] card designer. There is also the other historical flaw; Evolutions tend to be best because
1) They are arbitrarily beefed up to compensate for being slower e.g. stronger attacks and more HP. Instead they are the ones that can afford to have the inexpensive-but-good Abilities and attacks, because they aren't hitting the field first turn.
2) Evolution acceleration - we've seen several formats like this. I won't deny that they may be amongst the best in the game, but they still would have been better with appropriate balance. Generic Evolution acceleration is a terrible idea; if it isn't "pre-nerfed" such acceleration becomes broken.
Are you joking? The LuxChomp format was extremely closed, the only real competitive decks were ___Chomp variants (sound familiar? mewtwo ex?) and Gyarados.
Almost NOTHING could beat both of those reliably until the hard rotation eliminated both altogether. I think the very first pokemon to come close was Yanmega Prime and even that was hardly a sure thing.
- Status