Pokémon TCG: Sword and Shield—Brilliant Stars

Sabledonk - math and analyzation

Status
Not open for further replies.
sabledonk is cheeper and there are ways around it so im not to worried. but i do want them to ban the card.
Click to expand...

But the thing is, the ways around it are luck based anyway. Even if you tech in 4 tombs to your gdos or 4 sableye to your luxchomp/vilegar/magnerock/whatever, there is still nothing you can do if you don't draw into them in your first 7 cards.

There are a million different quick fixes pokemon could pursue, and they don't really have good enough reasons not to.
 
I think they're waiting until Spring BRs to see if Sableye really is overpowered.

so... for the good of the format, all you Sableye haters need to suck it up and play Sableye variants for BRs.
 
Last edited:
Amt said:
I think they're waiting until Spring BRs to see if Sableye really is overpowered.

so... for the good of the format, all you Sableye haters need to suck it up and play Sableye variants for BRs.
Click to expand...

For the record, I agree with this interpretation. After all this user input it would be a complete betrayal of the players not to do anything, and it would permanently damage TPCi's reputation. They can claim they are powerless to fix this issue, but the players know the truth.

Go out and play Sabledonk for battle roads, to prove how ridiculous it really is.
 
Last edited:
I'm no Sableye hater, in fact I find the little purple thing with sapphires for eyes quite charming.
I just don't like the idea of 90% of the games at the next load of tournaments lasting no more than 1 turn ;)
 
well then here's your chance to do something about it, at least in time for Nationals. Prove to TPCi how unfair Sableye is with the new T/S/S rule.
 
Box of Fail said:
For the record, I agree with this interpretation. After all this user input it would be a complete betrayal of the players not to do anything, and it would permanently damage TPCi's reputation. They can claim they are powerless to fix this issue, but the players know the truth.

Go out and play Sabledonk for battle roads, to prove how ridiculous it really is.
Click to expand...

P!P are not powerless but they will be constrained in what they can do.

Modified as a format has to seem reasonable to parents who won't understand why the cards they bought last year are no longer allowed. It won't matter that they bought older sets they will just remember that they bought something that was worth less than expected. An early rotation is going to upset a lot of customers. Not rotating is going to upset a lot of customers.

Since there is quite a lot of speculation in this thread I'll make a prediction for 2012/2013. No matter how desireable it is in Japan to have games that end quickly no player likes to lose before they have even drawn a card. I see no reason why Japanese players will be an exception. So despite the obvious simplification that allowing Trainers turn one without restriction brings to explaining how to play to new players. The advantage of going first will become too much even for a HGSS-on / B&W-on format and PCL/Japan will reintroduce some kind of restriction on what can be played by the player who wins the coin toss. It is almost impossible to avoid power creep so the advantage of going first with B&W rules is only going to increase over time. The only question is going to be how fast the power creep is with the change to HGSS-on and B&W rules in Japan.
 
Last edited:
Banning one card from the Modified format shouldn't be entirely out of their power though. Don't the guys at P!P have control over the particular aspect of formats outside of Japan, ergo, can control what cards are in or not.

A rotation (or lack thereof) is going to cost them players. The logical answer is to ban/limit the problem card(s) until they're rotated.
 
If only it was just one card.

Sableye is a problem. It is the standout obvious problem child for the interaction of pre HGSS cards with the B&W rules. But it is not alone in getting a boost in power from the B&W rules. Energy gain, Poke Turn, Collector, Uxie, PokeBlower+, Junk Arm, BTS, Seeker can all be exploited to reduce the chance that the opponent draws a card. I expect the list does not stop there.
 
Dont ban sableye, ban its body.
Seriously though, is there some kind of website where everyone complains to P!P about the format? I say someone makes one.
 
Today I did a little testing of my own with Sabledonk against some SP Pokemon. However, I was very generous and had my "opponent" play DialgaChomp and start with Dialga G, Garchomp C, and Absol G. Thats a 100 HP Pokemon, an 80 HP Pokemon, and a 70 HP Pokemon. I put Dialga as an Active, and the other two on the bench. Out of the 8 games I played, I believe I drew into Sableye 6 out of 8 times in my opening hand. This deck is extremely luck and chance based. Although I wasn't able to get a donk, I go very close several times, therefore, if this deck were to be played against, say a Yanmega deck, a donk is almost surefire. Out of the 8 games, I did a lot of testing with having my opponents active Pokemon as Spiritomb. Spiritomb crippled the deck very badly, HOWEVER, I do have a theory. I believe that a donk is still possible, even with an active Spiritomb. You'll have to get a very lucky hand, though. I wouldn't fret too much if my opponent has an active Spiritomb and a benched Pokemon; simply try and Seeker up the benched, get the Sp. Dark on Sableye, and Flashbite for 1 on Spiritomb. Game win.

I do see Sabledonk as a threat to all tournaments, but it's all luck-based. I encountered some times when the game could have been won with the successful coin flip of my SSU, but sadly, it turned out tails. Since I had to take a few cards from DialgaChomp, I could not test it deck vs. deck, but even if you dont get the T1 win, a win is still possible. I'm going to be doing more testing later, but for now, this is all I have.

P.S.: A double Tomb start isnt necessarily an auto-loss either. A Seeker, Flashbite, and Sp. Dark are all it takes. However, it's all luck based.
 
Time for PIP to learn a few things from MTG on how to implement and keep a healthy meta game. When you go first in MTG, you don't draw a card, and both players are able to set up their board to make for a challenging and strategic game. Something PIP doesn't seem to understand.
 
NoPoke said:
If only it was just one card.

Sableye is a problem. It is the standout obvious problem child for the interaction of pre HGSS cards with the B&W rules. But it is not alone in getting a boost in power from the B&W rules. Energy gain, Poke Turn, Collector, Uxie, PokeBlower+, Junk Arm, BTS, Seeker can all be exploited to reduce the chance that the opponent draws a card. I expect the list does not stop there.
Click to expand...

I honestly would not see that stuff other stuff being a problem if it weren't for Sableye. All of that other stuff was tolerable pre-BW rules, although still undesirable. You had the advantage with those cards only if you went second. Now, you will mostly have the advantage only if you go first.

IMO, the only thing the BW rules did for non-Sableye donk decks was shift the donk from the second turn to the first. But you gotta look at it from the other standpoint too.. if you DO go first against a donk deck, that gives you a chance to Collector/etc for a bench.

---------- Post added 04/24/2011 at 11:42 PM ----------

I'm actually against banning Sableye because it allows you to influence the opening coin flip. The coin flip has now injected so much luck into the system. I know luck is part of the game, but this is a clear cut disadvantage to the player who goes second. If Sableye is left in the format, you would be allowed to sacrifice 4 cards in your deck (whether you need Sableye for Impersonate or not) to play Sableye JUST to influence the opening coin flip beyond a 50/50.

I would like to have some way to control who goes first, because it's now completely unfair. Sableye really is not that problematic on its own. Don't get me wrong though, the format is in a terrible state.

---------- Post added 04/24/2011 at 11:47 PM ----------
JWittz said:
Yeah, I even say in the video that 40% is a rough estimate. You also have to factor in things like how many basics you run in the specific lists, etc. I asked some of the stat nerds what the results for my deck in particular would be, and I got somewhere around 46%--about halfway between me and Yoshi. I even found the 40% start statistics to be a little disturbing, so anything higher just further proves the point.

Edit--just realizes this is seven pages long and I replied to something on page 2. Time to get caught up!
Click to expand...

Yeahh I know it was more of a demonstration of how Sableye donks are bad.

Also, I wanted to say I really agreed with your build. Everyone is playing it with a Supporter engine for the Regice and I think it should just be a buffed Uxie donk.

Also also, this has grown a few pages since I last posted... Triple post go!
 
Last edited:
SableDonk is OVER HYPED.

It will NOT do as well as you seem to think.

SableDonk= VileGar & LostGar...don't believe the hype
 
walrus said:
SableDonk is OVER HYPED.

It will NOT do as well as you seem to think.

SableDonk= VileGar & LostGar...don't believe the hype
Click to expand...

You're probably right Sabledonk won't consistently win, but it will disrupt things along the way. This morning, I thought about it this way:

Pooka plays a skill-based deck to win up to 80% of the time.
If Pooka picks up Sabledonk, he will win only 60% of the time.

Let's say an average player with a skill deck can win 40%-50% of the time.
If the average player picks up luck-based Sabledonk, their percentage goes up to a solid 60%.

Pooka with DialgaChomp meets average player with Sabledonk. Average player is favored by 10%, because it's not based on skill anymore. Pooka's chances of winning this match go from 80% to 40%.
Average players at Nationals outnumber Pooka at least 10 to 1.
Pooka's (or any other really good player's) chances of winning at Nationals decreases significantly with Sabledonk in the format.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top