Proposing a possible first: Ban from Unlimited?

Discussion in 'TCG News & Gossip Discussion' started by dkates, Oct 7, 2003.

8 league13 468 60
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. dkates

    dkates New Member

    Although I have more or less shifted to Modified, I still like to play Unlimited every once in a while. But one card, more powerfully than any other, keeps popping up again and again to ruin many decks that would otherwise be viable. That card is Genesis Slowking, known by most simply as Slowking. Because of a change in translation, a card that would have probably ended up being barely noticeable became the most broken form of Trainer denial this game has ever seen. Sneasel, even, is not so bad. At least Sneasel is not too hard to counter, and has an element of luck. With Slowking, despite the flips, there is practically no luck involved, nor skill, nor even much strategy. It has, in my opinion, ruined Unlimited.
    So, what am I proposing? Obviously, it is far too late to errata the card. Leaving things as they are clearly won't improve anything. So, I propose that Slowking be the first card ever to be banned from Unlimited. You heard me, banned.
    Some will say, "Two other cards are banned from Unlimited." Point taken, but there is a big difference. Ancient Mew is unplayable because it has never been printed in English. Its ban is no different from the fact that Unlimited (outside of Japan) does not allow cards that were only printed in Japan. "Birthday" Pikachu was supposedly banned for being overpowered. Yes, it's overpowered -- in one situation. It's what the situation is that resulted in this card being banned -- you can't feasibly prove whether it's your birthday or not.
    Slowking, on the other hand, would truly be the first ban of its kind. I am proposing it be banned from Unlimited not because it has a characteristic that renders it impossible to play, which is not the case, but because of overpowering. That got it banned from Modified, but it was left to ruin Unlimited, and, in my opinion, it did.
    I realize that this is a very radical proposal, but it's one that I feel would have a positive effect on the game. For now, I propose that only Slowking should be affected by this. There are other cards that many Unlimited players, including myself, feel are overpowered and are showing up in too many decks, but they are much easier to counter than Slowking is. Therefore, as I stated before, I believe that only Slowking should be placed under this ban.
  2. NoPoke

    NoPoke New Member

    Nah just wait for the high level tournaments involving many players where you switch to Japanese rulings and card interpretation. That'll fix Slowking!
  3. dkates

    dkates New Member

    If you're right, and Slowking does change to the original Japanese version, then my proposal does become unnecessary. However, as I don't keep tabs on tournaments, I have no way of knowing when or if this will happen. If it doesn't, I stand by my proposal to kick it out of the format.
  4. PokePop

    PokePop Administrator

    One solution would be for PUSA to reprint the card with the corrected text. That would eliminate the need to ban it and bring the world-play of it into line with Japan.
  5. dkates

    dkates New Member

    Now there's another good idea. Much less radical, and easily implemented. Of course, doing so would also, by definition, bring this corrected Slowking back into Modified, but a little Trainer denial is not such a bad thing, as long as it's not overdone. After all, Slowking as is may be the most powerful Trainer denial ever printed, but it's not the only Trainer denial ever printed -- far from it, in fact.
  6. )v(ajin_ipg21

    )v(ajin_ipg21 New Member

    Do you know what the JAPANESE SLowking does?
    IT IS so less powerful and it's attack is Average *if that*

    IT is NOT cumulative and only works while in the active position.

    *Would shed a tear, I would not miss sneasal but would miss Slowking*
  7. dkates

    dkates New Member

    I was aware of that, actually, which is why I am willing to drop this proposal if Slowking is edited to that version.
    The fact that Slowking's Power is cumulative is the only reason it is broken. The fact that it can prevent Trainers from being played? Not the first time that's happened, and decks were always adjusted accordingly -- we figured it out, countered it, and moved on.
    But when it takes almost no effort to reduce your opponent's chances of playing Trainers to 1/8 or 1/16, we have a problem. When this can be done with little risk on the part of the player who is restricting his opponent in such a way, the card is unreasonably overpowered, far past the point of being broken.
    That Slowking's Power is active only when it is was obviously meant to balance the card. I would even be satisfied even if it were still allowed to work from the bench without being cumulative, but using the Japanese version is the easiest way to edit the card, since that wording already exists.
    Slowking, more than Cleffa, Tyrogue, or Sneasel, or any other card, has ruined the Unlimited experience for me. I can counter Cleffa easily. I can counter Tyrogue with only marginally more effort. I can counter Sneasel, perhaps not so easily, but without too much difficulty. But Slowking is all but impossible to counter. Not only that, but every counter to Slowking is itself easily countered. More than that, a win using a Slowking deck is obviously not very satisfying to the player with the Slowking deck -- where's the pleasure in winning when your chances of losing are all but non-existant?
    Some people would say, "So don't play Unlimited." However, that means that far more than half of my collection is made up of cards I will never play again. I do not want to make that sacrifice, and I am sure that I am not the only one. I have had many interesting matches in Unlimited, but I have never enjoyed a game played against a Slowking deck, even if I won.
    The game of Pokemon was meant to be a game of skill. When a single card can suck every bit of skill out of the game, action must be taken. My only regret is that action was not taken sooner. I'm sorry to see that you would miss Slowking, but I would wager that you are in the minority. I, for one, say that Slowking must be dethroned.
  8. yoshi1001

    yoshi1001 New Member

    But then there's 2-on-2 unlimited. ;)

    Seriously, I think this is a case of "It's so broke why bother fixing it?" Unlimited, is in my view a wasteland beyond repair. I haven't changed my unlimited deck in two years and it still works just fine.

    Besides, unlimited is supposed to be a haven for all cards, except for those that just don't work. Unlimited is there to remind us why we have modified.
  9. SteveP

    SteveP Active Member

    Nope, I say leave Slowking as is in Unlimited. Too much trainermon in unlimited. Anyway, I anticipate that all major tournaments will be Modified/Limited, so those who play only Unlimited will be left behind.

    Also, I'm guilty of using a mistranslated card. My favorite Unlimited deck is Blaine's Charizard.
  10. dkates

    dkates New Member

    Nicely stated, yoshi, but I disagree. Unlimited is supposed to be a format where your deckbuilding has a minimal number of restrictions. But Slowking, while it doesn't change the rules of the game, destroys the viability of many decks. That, to me, is the worst sort of limitation -- "Yes, you can do this, but because of this one card, you'll almost certainly lose." IMO, Unlimited is not as bad as you say it is. It's not as good as it should be, but when Slowking isn't there, it's actually a very fun format. I would prefer that Slowking be edited into a form that is not broken. I would note here, however, that it is IMPERATIVE that it be CRYSTAL CLEAR that the edited version overrides the old one. And if this cannot happen, or until it does, Slowking cannot be allowed to continue its reign of terror. Why should a card that can single-handedly suck the strategy and the fun out of the game be allowed to do so? Why should the only escape from this card require that the player use only the newest cards? If my adamance on this issue is not yet clear, this should make it clear:
    And I almost never raise my voice, online or in real life.

    In response to SteveP's comment about Trainermon, allow me to quote a line that was in my signature as of a few weeks ago: "There is NOTHING WRONG with Trainermon." Of course, this is opinion, but I also feel that Slowking does not solve the problem, even if there is a problem to solve. The deck with the Slowking can have as many Trainers as the deckbuilder cares to put in. That is the other part of why Slowking is so broken -- it's one-sided. If the flip were obligatory for both sides, Slowking would have the risk necessary to balance its strength out.

    I do not want to sound like I am closed-minded, but I feel it to be essential that something be done about this. As to how, I am open to any solution that works, be it the ban I proposed, an errata to power it down (with or without reprint), whatever. But I am not willing to stand by while this card's negative effect on the game is ignored.
    Last edited: Oct 7, 2003
  11. BJJ763

    BJJ763 Trading Mod Supervisor Staff Member Trader Feedback Mod

    First ban Slowking.

    Then ban Professor Oak.

    Then Base Blastoise.

    Then Super Energy Removal.

    Then Chaos Gym (sorry IP!)

    Keep going down the list until Dunsparse and Basic Energy is left.
  12. SteveP

    SteveP Active Member

    Personally, I don't like Slowking. After seeing Slowking/something dominate the Worlds in Seattle, I pushed to have it's mistranslation corrected. Instead, it was banned from Modified a few months later.

    dkates, there are plenty of anti-Slowking tactics out there for unlimited players. I always found it fun to play Dark Vileplume against Slowking players and give them a more bitter taste of their own medicine.

    Sorry, I think excessive use of the Unlimited format for tournaments is what truly ruins this game, not any single card. Get your TO to run Modified if you don't like Slowking. JMO.
  13. dkates

    dkates New Member

    SteveP -- Actually, I've been off the tournament scene for the last few months. And the only one I ever went to was only Unlimited. Unfortunately, the anti-Slowking strategies are usually wrecked by whatever Slowking is partnered with. My point is, that's exactly the argument I expected to hear -- "Don't like Slowking? Play Modified." Well, I did, and it's well and good, but those should not be the only options.

    BJJ763 -- Note that I said Slowking is the only card that should be subject to this ban. This was to avoid just the kind of thing your response said. Yes, Slowking isn't the only card that's showing up everywhere, but it is the only one that requires a deck focus to counter. You can't just tech in anti-Slowking -- it doesn't work. If you want to beat Slowking, you have to build your deck around beating Slowking. [EDIT] And this seems to be a familiar argument. Didn't people say something like this when Slowking and Sneasel got banned from Modified?
    Last edited: Oct 7, 2003
  14. )v(ajin_ipg21

    )v(ajin_ipg21 New Member


    It is all about metagame. If you see Slowking metagame it. YOU don't, then you have no need for it.

    GO ahead and BE stubborn but take it easy. It's ONLY a game *drips with irony*

    PS Slowking TecH does work and works anti-other decks... all about playing style and deck building style...
    Last edited: Oct 7, 2003
  15. NoPoke

    NoPoke New Member

    I'ts a baby and its cute and yellow and Slowking doesn't like it much.
  16. dkates

    dkates New Member

    Yeah, there's Pichu, but that is easily foiled. After all, Slowking does have 80 HP. 4 turns is plenty of time to foil the little yellow rat.
  17. jdb728

    jdb728 New Member

    I agree with dkates wholeheartidly, something should be done about Slowking, the card is way too far beyond "broken", sure there are counters to it, but the problem is that the only way to constantly beat Slowking, is to build the entire deck to counter Slowking, and then the deck will lose to almost everything else.

    The problem isn't that Slowking counters Trainermon, it's that Slowking keeps one player from even being able to play trainers, while allowing the one playing Slowking to play as much Trainermon as they want. I have no real problem with Dark Vileplume, while Dark Vileplume counters Trainermon, at least it works against both players. Those of you who play Slowking to "counter Trainermon", you shouldn't have any problem with playing Dark Vileplume instead(unless of course you have a problem playing a card that's not so completely unfairly one-sided).

    That's just my opinion, it may not be worth much, after all, I was only a Master Prof(only reason I'm not anymore is because PUSA took over and put us all back at Prof). I also have too much first hand expirience seeing Slowking wins so many games because it's so far beyond broken.
  18. Baboon

    Baboon New Member

    I agree with dkates to a point. Unlimited is definitely hurt by Slowking in multiples. When people's whole decks run off of shutting down the opponent, such as running 4 Slowkings, it kinda gets boring and pointless.
    All the other cards, as he mentioned, CAN rather easily be shut down. Slowking is without boundaries for the most part.

    Errata'ing Slowking as a non-Modified legal Promo, or even a Modified Promo using the Japanese wording appears to be the best in my opinion. One could argue that Slowking's been in Unlimited since 2000 as it was in Modified. The Japanese version is REALLY not broken or anything along those lines.

    Now: Unlimited is not a wasteland. It's the origin of the game. It's a matter of preference. Some people like slower games with fewer choices, their format being Modified. Some like the rush of Unlimited. As long as everyone is on the level playing field, there's nothing really wrong. What I mean by this is that if everyone has Computer Search, Item Finder, Gust of Wind, etc, that's all fine. The difference with Slowking is that if a Slowking deck comes across a non-Slowking deck, THEN it's unfair. As far as Trainers go, the majority of competitive decks share a common base. Pokemon are not shared throughout.

    Finally: Unlimited is STILL an official format. If it were so wasted as some people make it out to be, there would be a semi-Modified to make the Unlimited experience better, which there isn't, and probably won't be. This means currently, Unlimited is not that bad of a format, except for Slowking and a very FEW cards that hurt it. I personally like the change of pace to something faster and with more powerful cards once in a while. Slowking just is a negative force, as Dark Vileplume was back in the original Modified. Negative cards are fair if everyone can use it, but having it so that mostly only Slowking players will have the edge is not fair.
    Chaos Gym is double-sided.
    Oak is used everywhere, so it's fair. 2003?
    SER is used very commonly, so even though I don't like it, it's fair for Unlimited.
    Last edited: Oct 7, 2003
  19. dkates

    dkates New Member

    Just a note. If an errata or reprint is possible, I would vastly prefer that to completely banning the card. What is important is that it become balanced.
  20. ilc

    ilc New Member

    You know normally I would agree, but that's why they call it Unlimited :p I sometimes play the format(though lately I've been disembling my decks, seeing why bother? No tournaments for it anyways), and if they started adding restrictions and bans on Unlimited.... it just wouldn't be the same. I see your point how Slowking is messed up, but still..... Unlimited is Unlimited :p

    Last edited: Oct 7, 2003
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page