Should we add another benefit to evolving? (If so, what)

[Ignatious]

There's nothing wrong with "overpowered basics". The game requires more skill now than it ever has since the SPs were rotated and we received B/W. I also understand sour grapes about players favorite pokemon (which happen to be stage 2s) being unplayable, but realistically that's completely unavoidable.

Seriously. I don't see how this is a problem.

 

[Benjineer]

I believe that we should take away the rule about delaying evolving and have the only problem getting all of the cards in your hand at once. Also, I think that it would be good to give a little bit more power to stage twos so that they are a more viable play. I think that the format is fine right now but this would definitely be a better format

 

[vaporeon]

There's nothing wrong with "overpowered basics". The game requires more skill now than it ever has since the SPs were rotated and we received B/W. I also understand sour grapes about players favorite pokemon (which happen to be stage 2s) being unplayable, but realistically that's completely unavoidable.

Seriously. I don't see how this is a problem.

Can you please explain how overpowered basics bring more skill to the game?

 

[Benzo]

Why not have a new rule that Basic level ex's can not attack basics that can evolve?
Sort of like an auto-immuneity deal?

Having a basic with only 60hp is nice and all, but, wont last to even evolve or if it does survive- the evolution form will have only 1 turn to do something or become KO when your opponant's turn.

The amount of effort to get an evolved Pokemon into play is nothing considered to the amount of effort it takes to attatch a DCE on a basic in one turn.

Why not have the Basics have like 120 hp to start. When you evolve it, add 20 hp. Then evolve to stage 2 and add only 10hp. Also, make the attacks cost at least 1 less for a reasonable amount of damage.

All I know, is, something needs to be done-something in order to bring back the old glory of rewarding your efforts in getting that stage two out there,

 

[Ignatious]

Can you please explain how overpowered basics bring more skill to the game?

Of course, I should have done so from the beginning. I appreciate the respectful response.
Okay lets take a look at the flaws of the stage 2 mechanic.

1) Eats away deck space.

Lets compare EelZone with ZekEels. For example purposes, we'll say both decks want a solid 3-3 line of Eels for energy acceleration security. After this, ZekEels need 2 deck slots for effectiveness. Zekroms are easily Revived, or Super Rod can fetch both at once. They are easy to recycle and keep them coming. Effectiveness for a Magnezone line would be 4 Magnemite, as swarming with the basic is absolutely crucial. 1-2 Magneton is required as well. Then you have 3-4 Zones that need to be hit. After that you have the 4 Rare Candies that are needed, it's only way to speed up your deck, and have any hope of keeping up with basics. ZekEels needs 2 spaces. Magnezone needs 12-14. This leaves a disgustingly small amount of deck space to with with for the rest of the deck.

2) Lack of versatility.

Again with EelZone vs ZekEels. This is directly related to the first issue, with so many deck spots consumed, your deck automatically becomes a one trick pony. A couple of Zekroms can be fit in, but that's about it. You simply can't afford to lose efficiency with such a set-up reliant deck. In a Zekrom deck, you have 10-12 extra deck slots to fit in additional attack options or deck juices (ie the tech trainers such as catcher, pluspower, switch, junk arm, etc). You can have Zapdos for bench hitting after bringing up an Eel active, or gaining a cheap prize without using catcher. Zekrom EX for large damage output on a durable body. Tornadus for turn 2 attacking and fighting resistance. Mewtwo for countering other Mewtwos and taking advantage of a weak playing field. Thundurus for consistent turn 2 attacking and fueling the discard pile. Tyrouge for Turn 1 prizes and energyless damage. Boufalant for KOing Eels and Zekroms with the most efficient energy requirements. With the next set this list goes even further along. You end up with a toolbox of a plethora of attacks, and and trainers to help along the way. A Magnezone deck usually just has Lost Burn and Magnetic Draw to work with and maybe an additional attacker to help with zoned energy.

3) Lack of consistency.

With the same two decks, they each have separate goals for their first and second turns. On the first turn for a ZekEel deck, you want to have Thundurus active and charge with two benched Tynamo. This is very easily done, and happens nearly every game. On turn 2, there usually isn't much pressure to evolve, considering there's no rush to fuel your attackers considering you already have an active Thundurus grabbing you a prize. Turn 3 is a perfectly acceptable time to evolve your Tynamos. For the Magnezone deck, their first turn needs at least 2 Tynamo 1 Zekrom and 2 Magnemite in play, which is harder to do , not just because you need more Pokemon, but also because you don't have as much room in your deck for cards that grab these said basics, like stated above in flaw 1. Their turn 2 is even more demanding. You'll need to start evolving right away, and you need to replace whatever pokemon is KOed. Your deck only has one trick, and this one trick needs both Eels and Zones in play to work. If they KOed a Tynamo, you'll need a Candy, a Magnezone, a Tynamo and an Eel. Using Dynamotor ASAP is more important with how slow the deck is at actually attacking, you can't fall even further behind. Because this deck's needs in the first few turns incredibly overwhelm the needs of the basic deck, the deck will have a lot more "inefficient" hands. With the cards you draw being more influential of the game, this adds a lot of the luck element to opening hands and what supporters can grab you.



Now think about a format where a low of the decks have these problems. Decks are easier to build, as you build your deck to set up its one trick. A basic deck build requires a blend of many attackers for many different situations, which attackers are used and how much of each differ from list to list and there is no right answer about it. Playstyle actually matters here. With these decks all only doing one thing, there isn't much in game thought. You don't play many match ups differently. You can never be creative on how to handle a given threat. Choosing which attackers to use in which order to attack which Pokemon takes skill. A good amount of skill and this is ESPECIALLY true if you play second with the ridiculous first turn rules. Furthermore many hands and card combinations would be out of a given players control. If an opening hand doesn't give you the first turn you need, and your opponent does have their first turn "correct", you'll be literally out of luck, where in this basic dominant format, having the "correct" first turn is bound to happen, putting the outcome of the games more in the hands of the players themselves.



To be honest, I think our format has a lot of skill required. Many different options are available no matter what deck you play, both before and after deck construction. With the extra space, you can make your deck more consistent and be more creative. This isn't to say that these problems with evolutions cannot be fixed. I'm sure they could make a format where stage 2s don't eat up deck space, they each have many different attacking options, and make them incredibly consistent to boot, however that's not my point. My point is that there is nothing wrong with our format (seriously, no matter how good a format is, improvements CAN be made and people WILL complain). As the old saying goes; don't fix what's not broken.

 

[Tash]

I think that in the future a distinction needs to be made between basic Pokemon who evolve and those who don't. That way we don't get things like Eviolite working on every EX ever again.

 

[vaporeon]

Of course, I should have done so from the beginning. I appreciate the respectful response.
Okay lets take a look at the flaws of the stage 2 mechanic.

1) Eats away deck space.

Lets compare EelZone with ZekEels. For example purposes, we'll say both decks want a solid 3-3 line of Eels for energy acceleration security. After this, ZekEels need 2 deck slots for effectiveness. Zekroms are easily Revived, or Super Rod can fetch both at once. They are easy to recycle and keep them coming. Effectiveness for a Magnezone line would be 4 Magnemite, as swarming with the basic is absolutely crucial. 1-2 Magneton is required as well. Then you have 3-4 Zones that need to be hit. After that you have the 4 Rare Candies that are needed, it's only way to speed up your deck, and have any hope of keeping up with basics. ZekEels needs 2 spaces. Magnezone needs 12-14. This leaves a disgustingly small amount of deck space to with with for the rest of the deck.

2) Lack of versatility.

Again with EelZone vs ZekEels. This is directly related to the first issue, with so many deck spots consumed, your deck automatically becomes a one trick pony. A couple of Zekroms can be fit in, but that's about it. You simply can't afford to lose efficiency with such a set-up reliant deck. In a Zekrom deck, you have 10-12 extra deck slots to fit in additional attack options or deck juices (ie the tech trainers such as catcher, pluspower, switch, junk arm, etc). You can have Zapdos for bench hitting after bringing up an Eel active, or gaining a cheap prize without using catcher. Zekrom EX for large damage output on a durable body. Tornadus for turn 2 attacking and fighting resistance. Mewtwo for countering other Mewtwos and taking advantage of a weak playing field. Thundurus for consistent turn 2 attacking and fueling the discard pile. Tyred face powder for Turn 1 prizes and energyless damage. Boufalant for KOing Eels and Zekroms with the most efficient energy requirements. With the next set this list goes even further along. You end up with a toolbox of a plethora of attacks, and and trainers to help along the way. A Magnezone deck usually just has Lost Burn and Magnetic Draw to work with and maybe an additional attacker to help with zoned energy.

3) Lack of consistency.

With the same two decks, they each have separate goals for their first and second turns. On the first turn for a ZekEel deck, you want to have Thundurus active and charge with two benched Tynamo. This is very easily done, and happens nearly every game. On turn 2, there usually isn't much pressure to evolve, considering there's no rush to fuel your attackers considering you already have an active Thundurus grabbing you a prize. Turn 3 is a perfectly acceptable time to evolve your Tynamos. For the Magnezone deck, their first turn needs at least 2 Tynamo 1 Zekrom and 2 Magnemite in play, which is harder to do , not just because you need more Pokemon, but also because you don't have as much room in your deck for cards that grab these said basics, like stated above in flaw 1. Their turn 2 is even more demanding. You'll need to start evolving right away, and you need to replace whatever pokemon is KOed. Your deck only has one trick, and this one trick needs both Eels and Zones in play to work. If they KOed a Tynamo, you'll need a Candy, a Magnezone, a Tynamo and an Eel. Using Dynamotor ASAP is more important with how slow the deck is at actually attacking, you can't fall even further behind. Because this deck's needs in the first few turns incredibly overwhelm the needs of the basic deck, the deck will have a lot more "inefficient" hands. With the cards you draw being more influential of the game, this adds a lot of the luck element to opening hands and what supporters can grab you.



Now think about a format where a low of the decks have these problems. Decks are easier to build, as you build your deck to set up its one trick. A basic deck build requires a blend of many attackers for many different situations, which attackers are used and how much of each differ from list to list and there is no right answer about it. Playstyle actually matters here. With these decks all only doing one thing, there isn't much in game thought. You don't play many match ups differently. You can never be creative on how to handle a given threat. Choosing which attackers to use in which order to attack which Pokemon takes skill. A good amount of skill and this is ESPECIALLY true if you play second with the ridiculous first turn rules. Furthermore many hands and card combinations would be out of a given players control. If an opening hand doesn't give you the first turn you need, and your opponent does have their first turn "correct", you'll be literally out of luck, where in this basic dominant format, having the "correct" first turn is bound to happen, putting the outcome of the games more in the hands of the players themselves.



To be honest, I think our format has a lot of skill required. Many different options are available no matter what deck you play, both before and after deck construction. With the extra space, you can make your deck more consistent and be more creative. This isn't to say that these problems with evolutions cannot be fixed. I'm sure they could make a format where stage 2s don't eat up deck space, they each have many different attacking options, and make them incredibly consistent to boot, however that's not my point. My point is that there is nothing wrong with our format (seriously, no matter how good a format is, improvements CAN be made and people WILL complain). As the old saying goes; don't fix what's not broken.

I also respect the response given. With the way our format is, cards from the HGSS block are not designed to work with cards from the BW block. I feel (and this is my opinion) that decks that require some kind of setup require more skill the be played. I put auto pilot decks and skillful decks in different categories. Zek/eels is an auto pilot deck, much like durant. any other 4 pokemon deck and most other decks we have now.

When it comes to stage 2 Pokemon, you know you need to dedicate at least 9 spaces to your stage 2 line and maybe another 8 to 10 on other Pokemon. Depending on your Pokemon you'll need 12 to 16 spots for energy unless your pokemon line can work with low energy (Base Charizard/ Ho-Oh Legend/Hydragon) or you can accelerate it. That leave you with at least 31 card spaces if you go with the lows. Now you need 12 to 15 Supporeter and the rest item, again depending on your pokemon lines and what they do.

The problem with our format now is there's no balance. Decks with 4 Pokemon in them win tournaments that should not. The returned the EX mechanic at the wrong time (which is why I believe they will rotate to Next Destinies). There needs to be a clear balance between each stage in Pokemon.

Maybe something like this;

Basis Pokemon that don't evolve and their support
Basic Pokemon that evolve and their support (evolite)
Stage 1 Pokemon and their support
Stage 2 Pokemon with limited support
Basic Pokemon reclassified as Legendary Pokemon with limited support (don't count as basic during setup and can't be searched by cards that target basic)


Just something along those line.

 

[ALEXARD]

In the older ex era, the basics were almost as good as the stage pokemon, but stage pokemon had a lot of support, like:

Scramble Energy
Boost Energy
Double Rainbow Energy
Meteor Falls & Memory Berry (allowing them to use pre-evolution attacks)

If evolved Pokemon get a bonus, that should be to use their previous stages attacks and abilities, sort of like lv X did (Haxorus and Garchomp could become awesome to play).

Those special energies should not be a problem for the BW-on format, since there is gonna be a remodeling hammer to take care of them.

Abilities against EX are worthless, Sygilyph and Bouffalant aren`t that fast to attack and they are easy prey for Terrakion and Tornadus.

 

[Otaku]

I did explain how it can go wrong though - someone makes a card that interacts with a pair of other cards in a way they didn't think of, and this combination allows turn 1 KOs again.

So you're saying that since the staff isn't perfect, the idea is bad. This is why I kept asking for more specifics: every suggestion for the game suffers from the flaw you are citing. No, not the exact flaw, but a failure to notice card interactions. That is can and does happen anyway: it is on the designers, not governing principals of card design. If your worried that such constraints will make card design more difficult and that is why more mistakes will be made, please say so. I'd counter that point by explaining that a well developed set of design principles, taking the new rules into account, eliminates more potential problems than it creates.

I realise this isn't very specific, but that's only because - as you say yourself - your idea isn't any more specific in the first place. Unless I'm mistaken, it's simply "design all cards so you can never attack for massive damage turn 1". The only way I could be more specific against that is if I predicted every possible card they could possibly make ever in the history of mankind, and pointed out the flaw with every single one...

Actually you only need to plan out cards for a format... I am pretty sure they actually do that. They don't release everything at once, and I am quite sure there is fine tuning going on, but I believe they at least have a rough idea of what they are shooting for. I am literally just asking the designers to do their job, provided they adopted such guidelines. This is part of R&D for TCGs.

Can you see the problem?

Actually, no I don't. >.> I am leery of Evolving Basic Pokemon with Ability based Energy acceleration. If there is such a Pokemon, then the designers must make sure that any Energy shifting cards do not undo the work of avoiding first turn damaging attacks. There are multiple ways to do this. Off the top of my head:

1) Make sure that Energy Types compatible with the combo have no attacks that can be powered first turn even with the combo.
2) Make sure the Energy transferring effect is not on a Basic Pokemon or available via a Trainer.
3) Make sure the combo cannot be used more than once per turn.

So first turn Ponyta ends up with (RR). The designers again must do their job, and not make a "broken" Rapidash with some amazing stats and attacks due to the speed with which Rapidash can be powered up. Since you added a clause preventing Ponyta from Evolving the turn it uses its Ability, that means turn two you can have a Rapidash with three Energy attached, so Rapidash must be designed with that in mind.

Moltres KOs whatever it is using to "heal" itself, yes? So... a Basic Pokemon with 140 HP that hits for 100 points of damage for :fire::fire::fire: and discards a Fire Energy from itself can KO one of the controlling player's Benched Pokemon to heal 20 points of damage for every :fire: Energy attached to the KOed Pokemon.

So if I don't KO Moltres, you're KOing something on your Bench to keep it alive... but whatever you're KOing has to have some serious Energy on it. So you're no Prizes ahead, and not even any Energy ahead unless you're leaving out a part of the combo.

Something I wish to make clear: we can't come up with a foolproof system. Nor are we trying to. The suggestions I am making are about improving fundamental aspects of the game so that it is easier to have an evenly paced format. So when compared to how things have always been done before, an aggressive deck is still only going off on the players second turn. Compared to the "no attacks first turn" we are still allowing set-up attacks and not taxing new players with learning that. Set-up attacks are very important for Evolutions, please remember. Compared to the "no damaging attacks" first turn rule, this one has a hope of being instituted: keeping track of that sounds hard enough for average players, let alone new players.

In many ways, a deck running has inertia: once you get your deck going, it wants to "keep going". Shortcuts for setting things up are fine so long as they aren't accessible those first few turns of the game: by the time a Stage 2 can, for example, can attach extra Energy from hand to a Pokemon via an Ability, your opponent has had at least two turns to set-up, and that second turn might have already begun their offensive.

A deck built on Basics will focus on different strategies than one based on Stage 1 Pokemon than one based on Stage 2 Pokemon (fully Evolved in each case, I mean), and decks built around multiple Stages will be a little different as well.

By the way, I never did experience Neo Discovery. I played this game a little when I was little and the first three or four sets had been released, but I didn't find someone else who played it, so I stopped trying. I didn't learn of leagues until recently, so I haven't been collecting or seriously playing before BW.

So... did you do your research now? This is a discussion where knowing the history of the game is important; many of the suggestions on this thread want to return to things that were done before... ignoring that they didn't really work then either (or if we thought they did, TPC mandated a change in them anyway, like the first turn rules).

So... yeah Neo Discovery Tyrogue was a threat the entire time it was out, and almost any time you looked at a Fighting Weak Pokemon, you were thinking "Oh, Tyrogue is going to put the hurt on this". There have been many other Pokemon that exploit Weakness or other aspects of the game with a seemingly small damaging first attack.

That first turn of "safety", especially combined with my other proposals, is no accident, but neither is keeping an opening attack. I am intentionally designing the rules so that there is a turn of building. Fully Evolved Basic Pokemon can be designed to make use of it, and of course actually Evolutions need it.

This also allows cards like PlusPower to exist (unless something stupid is done with it, like making it easy to spam). In the Base Set, you had to worry about an opponent, sometimes by exploiting Weakness, sometimes not, spamming up to four PlusPower first turn. That was back when PlusPower attached to the Active Pokemon. That a big part of Base Set Electabuzz and Hitmonchan's success.

I did have the privilege of getting donked by a HGSS Tyrogue once though, but I chalked that up to my own damn fault and took Solosis and his line out of my Zekrom deck (I did get to see the full force of Reuniclus+Zekrom+Cofagrigus once though, 'twas a great feeling).

Yeah... not the same thing. You had a deck specific Pokemon with 30 HP. That Tyrogue existed at a time when almost every Evolution line that began with something Fighting Weak had 60 HP or less. That means most Lightning and Colorless Pokemon had a problem. Before that, of course, we had Hitmonchan. Adding a coin flip does not automatically make something balanced; usually it just increases the luck factor which is not the same thing.

 

[tutti]

Ahh, I do see the problem with that Tyrogue now. I'm sorry that I didn't see it, and I see the point about 30 damage turn 1 being a problem. I do think it's a little beside the point though, since we're talking about possible solutions to prevent any damage turn 1.

Anyway, the main problem with my example is Exp. Share. There's also Revive, and if it'd still be in the format by the time these cards would be released, Twins. Also, just to point this out - my point here isn't that they shouldn't do anything like in that example, but that it can be really easy to let some combo slip through the cracks. In my example, just a single Exp. Share on hand in addition to those two will allow you to have two Fire energies attached on turn 1, and if you have Revive as well you could do it again if you can get a second Moltres - not too difficult if you have a way to renew your hand.

Also, the idea I've proposed is to simply block damage (and damage counters). Ideally I'd like to block all effects of anything, but I can see how that would be complicated. But in either case, you'd still be able to use setup attacks.

 

[Otaku]

Anyway, the main problem with my example is Exp. Share. There's also Revive, and if it'd still be in the format by the time these cards would be released, Twins.

Um... no they wouldn't be a problem unless reprinted. We are starting over. These changes would just be instituted (hypothetically) over the next few sets they design. I don't know the life cycle for designing a set, but I sincerely doubt they start a new set when the previous set is released... rather they start the next set probably at least partway through the life cycle of the previous set, maybe even two sets prior. As such it will unfortunately be two rotations minimum before we were down to just cards designed under the proposed guidelines.

The cards designed for a more balanced format, just like always, will probably be horribly underpowered when introduced. Eventually things will rotate so that all the old cards that weren't designed to work with the new card design will rotate out. That's just how it works with slow set rotation. Are we clear on this concept now? :lol:

Also, just to point this out - my point here isn't that they shouldn't do anything like in that example, but that it can be really easy to let some combo slip through the cracks. In my example, just a single Exp. Share on hand in addition to those two will allow you to have two Fire energies attached on turn 1, and if you have Revive as well you could do it again if you can get a second Moltres - not too difficult if you have a way to renew your hand.

You do realize this still isn't working on a player's first turn, right? As stated, it wouldn't matter anyway, but I want to be certain I am understanding your complaint. You read Exp. Share?

When your Active Pokémon is Knocked Out by damage from an opponent's attack, you may move 1 basic Energy card that was attached to that Pokémon to the Pokémon this card is attached to.

Emphasis added. For Exp. Share to trigger, your Active Pokemon must be KOed, and by damage from an opponent's attack, which your combo doesn't do.

Now... I don't know about you but my suggestion meant that neither player will be attacking for damage that first turn. So... Exp. Share could shunt Energy from a KOed Ponyta starting on your opponent's second turn and available to you on your third turn, by which time these kind of power combos are expected.

Also, the idea I've proposed is to simply block damage (and damage counters). Ideally I'd like to block all effects of anything, but I can see how that would be complicated. But in either case, you'd still be able to use setup attacks.

Which might work or might horribly fail if used now. Just saying; you're taking a bunch of cards not meant for a new rule and issuing a new rule. Probably safe though. At least from unbalancing.

What it isn't safe from is what I keep pointing out; you're creating an awkward rule for newer players, who will struggle to understand what "is" and "isn't" damage. I could accept the rule as a stop gap measure until cards could be designed so that they could not aggressively attack first turn, but complicating rules are complicating rules.

 

[tutti]

Ah, you're indeed right, I didn't recall the "damage from an attack" part... how horribly embarassing

So, bad example then. You could still use Energy Switch I guess.

I don't think it being complicated makes a good argument, though. We're expecting players to know the difference between damage and not damage anyway, with attacks and abilities placing damage counters, effects like poison doing the same, effects that only trigger specifically by damage etc. Adding a clause about turn 1 damage and damage counters would be much less complicated than this - if anything they do would cause them to place any number of damage counters on their opponents' pokémon, those damage counters aren't placed.

 

[Otaku]

So you're saying you didn't read the rest of my post then?

 

[Ignatious]

I also respect the response given. With the way our format is, cards from the HGSS block are not designed to work with cards from the BW block. I feel (and this is my opinion) that decks that require some kind of setup require more skill the be played. I put auto pilot decks and skillful decks in different categories. Zek/eels is an auto pilot deck, much like durant. any other 4 pokemon deck and most other decks we have now.

When it comes to stage 2 Pokemon, you know you need to dedicate at least 9 spaces to your stage 2 line and maybe another 8 to 10 on other Pokemon. Depending on your Pokemon you'll need 12 to 16 spots for energy unless your pokemon line can work with low energy (Base Charizard/ Ho-Oh Legend/Hydragon) or you can accelerate it. That leave you with at least 31 card spaces if you go with the lows. Now you need 12 to 15 Supporeter and the rest item, again depending on your pokemon lines and what they do.

The problem with our format now is there's no balance. Decks with 4 Pokemon in them win tournaments that should not. The returned the EX mechanic at the wrong time (which is why I believe they will rotate to Next Destinies). There needs to be a clear balance between each stage in Pokemon.

Maybe something like this;

Basis Pokemon that don't evolve and their support
Basic Pokemon that evolve and their support (evolite)
Stage 1 Pokemon and their support
Stage 2 Pokemon with limited support
Basic Pokemon reclassified as Legendary Pokemon with limited support (don't count as basic during setup and can't be searched by cards that target basic)


Just something along those line.

I don't mean to offend, but I thought that no one knew exactly how the card designs were made. For all we know, they could drink a lot one night and put card ideas on sticky notes all over the room and print whatever ideas stuck to their bodies when they wake up. Heck, even if Celebi wasn't "designed" to work with SkyArrow, like I said in my last post; it's not an issue. This format isn't too match up based, but also has a decent metagame at the same time.

I'm going to have to disagree with you when it comes to ZekEels taking no skill. For one building the deck is difficult, or at least more so than building Reshiphlosion or Prime Time back in their day. This is because there are so many options for deck construction. How many PlusPower? How many Catchers? Which attackers you choose to incorporate influences these types of choices, and eventually the deck needs a great balance and cards that all work well together. When building a set up deck, the primary focus is setting up, and usually that all you have to take into consideration. Your attackers are predetermined and your trainers are limited, and it's usually obvious which trainers work best with the given attacker.

Outside of deck construction, I find evolving to be a simple mechanic. For a set up deck, you lay down a huge bench. Then you start evolving them until you are able to attack, at which point you do so. From here on out, you keep attacking and you keep evolving as best you can. There's not much creativity within playing this type of deck, and the only real skill needed is the understanding of prize denial, to make sure you can make a comeback after set the set up. And heck, throughout the game, you'll need RC after RC to keep stage 2s coming, along with their evolution, along with regular needs such as energy placement and hitting a crucial catcher. Drawing everything you need in a given turn is out of a players hand, even with a great list. The less you need on a given turn, the more likely you'll draw them, and the less likely luck decides a game. These basic deck require more skill, and they reduce the luck factor.

Again, I don't think there is a problem with our format. Stage 2s suck. Even a stage 2 as nuts as Magnezone isn't seeing play but that's perfectly fine. We have a great meta, creative deck construction, and skill intensive games. I think the skill of this format would rival the SP format, if the first turn rule would have some form of balance, that is.


Alright. If stage 2s are desperately needed to be happy with the format, the only way to make them work is to solve the issues I posted above. Adding support cards will only make them more clunky and eat up more deck space. For deck space purposes and consistency purposes allow pokemon to auto evolve (like BTS) just only on the bench, or something to that effect. This will save space as the need for 4 basics goes down if they can evolve right away, and RC might not even be used at all. This will also make decks less combo oriented considering RC won't be needed and lines would probably be 3-3-3. For versatility, make multiple of the same stage 2. Two different Magnezones each with 2-4 attack options. This way you have to choose what you evolve into, and deck construction is more of a challenge. Furthermore, give the basic and stage 1 attacks that the stage 2 doesnt have. For instance give Magneton a LC attack for 80 damage. No lost zone required. Give Magnemite a L the opponent is paralized. Utility that is really good, but not broken. (however only not broken because switch/Junk Arm, it'd be too good without Junk Arm around). Make set up players actually choose which attack to use, and when to set up and who to set up to and the deck takes more skill as well.

 

[tutti]

So you're saying you didn't read the rest of my post then?

What part did I miss? As far as I can tell, you explained that these cards would be out of the format and are irrelevant to your argument, then you pointed out my stupidity regarding Exp. Share, then you said a "no damage" rule would be too complicated for new players.

 

[Otaku]

What part did I miss? As far as I can tell, you explained that these cards would be out of the format and are irrelevant to your argument, then you pointed out my stupidity regarding Exp. Share, then you said a "no damage" rule would be too complicated for new players.

So if you understood my arguments about rotation then why bring up Energy Switch? You may as well point out that Neo Genesis Slowking really ruins my plans as well.

I said a "no damage" rule would be too complicated for new players and that we have already seen that this bothers TPC. It isn't just me trying to be picky, but pointing out that arguing for it is like arguing for full tournaments of best two of three: we've basically been told "no" already.

I will add that it feels like we are giving TPC another chance to make bad cards this way. Bad cards can be overpowered to me, they can be underpowered to me, and they can be technically balanced but horribly boring and serving no purpose in the game.

I fear an increase in the latter because of a "no damage first turn" rule; cards will keep being designed as is and while the format will hopefully improve, instead of filler because the format is broken we'll be getting more filler where the excuse is "we have to make cards like this". You may write that off as a "me" thing if you wish.

I don't mean to offend, but I thought that no one knew exactly how the card designs were made. For all we know...

We don't know details. Obvious joke is obvious, but the message behind the joke is that they don't take care and if they don't... then they've misled the players thinking that they do. It isn't ever assumed that they randomly pick stuff, and that they do indeed play test and try to anticipate the format with their designs.

Don't worry, I am not going to make any claims that the current format does not require skill. I do wonder if skill would be higher in the game worked out I believe it should, but if the game were supposed to be exclusively about skill the rules would be radically, radically different.

I do argue that there are certain kinds of skill that are under or over utilized in the game. This can be most understood when someone tries to put forth arguments for a sideboard in Pokemon; Pokemon is not really designed for such a mechanic and when the game is properly run it really shouldn't be an issue. You cannot and should not have a "strong" match against every deck you face. It is the wrong part of the tournament structure being questions (again, these are my opinions).

And now for Ignatious...

Again, I don't think there is a problem with our format. Stage 2s suck. Even a stage 2 as nuts as Magnezone isn't seeing play but that's perfectly fine. We have a great meta, creative deck construction, and skill intensive games. I think the skill of this format would rival the SP format, if the first turn rule would have some form of balance, that is.

This is what really removes you from the debate; you are very biased against Stage 2 Pokemon. When the game is properly balanced no Stage is inherently better or worse than others; the game has seldom every been properly balanced in this regard. You also enjoy a much faster game than many of us do. You are entitled to enjoy what you like, but can you not see what you're overlooking?

The things you don't like because you don't find them enjoyable to play are the things most of us normally find enjoyable to play but also are finding significantly underwhelming this format. You choose to love the format and blame this failing on the inherent design of the Evolution mechanic; we choose to love how the game has worked in the past and could work in the future and write of the format as failing.

Alright. If stage 2s are desperately needed to be happy with the format, the only way to make them work is to solve the issues I posted above.

Right... some people advocate this, and I've repeatedly explained why suggestions like this just don't work. It is a matter of speed. Get this, some people play a game to... play a game! :lol: Crazy, am I right? Seriously though, that's what it comes across to players like me when we try to argue for a better paced format. You've got some people who just want a format where the game is over by a player's sixth turns tops, while others want it to go the distance.

You can think of it like you would a video game. Some people enjoy "microgame" based game play... and I am one of them. I can also enjoy epic, lengthy gameplay. The difference? Microgame based gameplay is for video games. Not TCGs. Not where you spend time testing your deck, trading for cards, driving to events, etc. Plus most Microgame based gameplay isn't one mistake equals instant game over.

 

[Ignatious]

This is what really removes you from the debate; you are very biased against Stage 2 Pokemon. When the game is properly balanced no Stage is inherently better or worse than others; the game has seldom every been properly balanced in this regard. You also enjoy a much faster game than many of us do. You are entitled to enjoy what you like, but can you not see what you're overlooking?

The things you don't like because you don't find them enjoyable to play are the things most of us normally find enjoyable to play but also are finding significantly underwhelming this format. You choose to love the format and blame this failing on the inherent design of the Evolution mechanic; we choose to love how the game has worked in the past and could work in the future and write of the format as failing.

Right... some people advocate this, and I've repeatedly explained why suggestions like this just don't work. It is a matter of speed. Get this, some people play a game to... play a game! :lol: Crazy, am I right? Seriously though, that's what it comes across to players like me when we try to argue for a better paced format. You've got some people who just want a format where the game is over by a player's sixth turns tops, while others want it to go the distance.

You can think of it like you would a video game. Some people enjoy "microgame" based game play... and I am one of them. I can also enjoy epic, lengthy gameplay. The difference? Microgame based gameplay is for video games. Not TCGs. Not where you spend time testing your deck, trading for cards, driving to events, etc. Plus most Microgame based gameplay isn't one mistake equals instant game over.

Pokemon takes more time, and is a more lengthy card game in general compared to every single successful TCG. In fact, other TCGs have enough time to play a 2/3 match within their 30 minutes. I don't understand the need for slower play. The way card games are made/played these days would agree with me on this, I don't understand where the idea of lengthy gameplay for TCGs came from. Perhaps you would like for them to be more lengthy, but they simply are not this way. If some want a longer game, and some want a shorter game, it s only natural for those not getting in their way to complain, regardless of which way it is. These complaints are unstoppable. What do you want done about it, have your way so that others complain? How about accept it the way it is, regardless of which it is. Just a heads up though, I'm sure the game will remain fast paced for a long time.

My love for a faster paced format has nothing to do with the discussion. The format takes skill. It has an effective metagame. It allows for creative deck types and deck construction. I have played this game since it came out, an played competitively since Neo Destiny. My greatest achievements come from this era. I know how the game used to be, the formats took skill, had a metagame and allowed for creativity all at the same time. The games were slower, which allowed for stage 2s to exist, but again, some people like that, and others don't. I don't.

My whole point from the beginning was that our format is fine the way it is. Even if you did make stage 2s playable, some would complain and others would enjoy. Truth is, the formats don't get much better than this, even though it's not satisfying your (any many others) personal niche.

 

[EliGagerNorris]

And now for Ignatious...



This is what really removes you from the debate; you are very biased against Stage 2 Pokemon.

And you are very biased against big Basic Pokemon.

 

[Otaku]

Pokemon takes more time, and is a more lengthy card game in general compared to every single successful TCG.

Which is why I am not playing those TCGs. :wink:

In fact, other TCGs have enough time to play a 2/3 match within their 30 minutes. I don't understand the need for slower play.

Pokemon doesn't play best two of three matches in the 30 minutes, and even if it could, the fundamental design of the game is geared towards slower play, with factors such as Evolutions and the Prize based game play.

The way card games are made/played these days would agree with me on this, I don't understand where the idea of lengthy gameplay for TCGs came from. Perhaps you would like for them to be more lengthy, but they simply are not this way. If some want a longer game, and some want a shorter game, it s only natural for those not getting in their way to complain, regardless of which way it is. These complaints are unstoppable. What do you want done about it, have your way so that others complain?

You're a customer. I'm a customer. We both let the seller know what we want and they decide which is better to deliver. I understand why you enjoy the game being fast paced. You yourself said most other TCGs are even faster, so... have you considered that you can play them? I am not telling you to stop playing, I am merely pointing out you have alternatives. I don't. I've tried other TCGs and found Pokemon to be my favorite even before factoring in my fondness of the franchise itself.

How about accept it the way it is, regardless of which it is. Just a heads up though, I'm sure the game will remain fast paced for a long time.

If I should accept the way the game is, and complaining is inevitable... shouldn't you simply be silent and accept my complaining? If the game remains fast paced, at least I've been allowed to say my peace. Well, unless you're in charge, apparently.

My love for a faster paced format has nothing to do with the discussion.

Everyone is biased. It is a side effect of being alive.

The format takes skill. It has an effective metagame. It allows for creative deck types and deck construction.

You protest too much methinks; notice how I said the game requires skill right now. Perhaps you are trying to convince yourself? Or did you mistake me for vaporeon? :lol:

I have played this game since it came out, an played competitively since Neo Destiny. My greatest achievements come from this era. I know how the game used to be, the formats took skill, had a metagame and allowed for creativity all at the same time. The games were slower, which allowed for stage 2s to exist, but again, some people like that, and others don't. I don't.

And this is why I pointed out you have reason to be biased. You said it yourself: this is the formats where you have done the best and you love it. Would you be so fond if you not only weren't on top, but were actually performing the worst you ever had? Doing well this format doesn't negate your input, but it does color it and needs to be acknowledged.

My whole point from the beginning was that our format is fine the way it is. Even if you did make stage 2s playable, some would complain and others would enjoy. Truth is, the formats don't get much better than this, even though it's not satisfying your (any many others) personal niche.

Your point actually seems to be that I shouldn't be allowed to voice my opinions on the game, even though I've been playing the game as long as you have, helped others learn how to play, written articles on the subject, and studied the game quite a bit. I have never been a big name player, but that's okay: I don't deserve that. Even when I am at the top of my game, so to speak, I tend to choke under pressure in tournaments. :lol:

You know what? That's fine by me; while I'd love to be a champ I know I my ego inflates like a balloon filled by mechanical methods. Thing is, whether I am winning or losing will affect how I view the game, I admit this. I admit this so that I can then try to adjust for it. Right now I am neither winning or losing a lot. In fact, I've had a hard time getting to play lately, and I only bring that up to point out I am talking to people.

I hear people's complaints, and I look to see if there is a way to solve them. Perhaps TPC has already done this, run the numbers, tested the ideas, and the game really is running the best it can. In which case I kindly ask them to quick making so much filler. Kind of hard to complain about useless Stage 2 Pokemon eating up space when they aren't in a set, you know? For that matter, hard to complain about useless Stage 1 and Basic Pokemon if they aren't getting made, either. :thumb:

And you are very biased against big Basic Pokemon.

Just checking: how long have you paid attention to what I said? Just curious; when the formats have been dominated by Evolutions, save those times I'd been on hiatus, I've then made the similar arguments for "restoring fully Evolved Basic Pokemon" to their rightful place. Plus right now, I actually am arguing for all fully Evolved Pokemon to be on an equal playing field; Stage 2 Pokemon have it worst right now, then Stage 1, but even many Basic Pokemon have been reduced to nothing but set filler because the power creep became the power leap.

 

[tutti]

So if you understood my arguments about rotation then why bring up Energy Switch? You may as well point out that Neo Genesis Slowking really ruins my plans as well.

It was just a side comment, it wasn't meant to be taken as further argument. It was just meant to make the example, based on the premises I thought were the case, not seem completely idiotic. I can't fix it being not relevant though, so let's put it aside?

I said a "no damage" rule would be too complicated for new players and that we have already seen that this bothers TPC. It isn't just me trying to be picky, but pointing out that arguing for it is like arguing for full tournaments of best two of three: we've basically been told "no" already.

I did explain that I don't think this rule would be complicated at all. If TPC's problem is a complicated first turn rule, then that shouldn't extend to a simple one.

I fear an increase in the latter because of a "no damage first turn" rule; cards will keep being designed as is and while the format will hopefully improve, instead of filler because the format is broken we'll be getting more filler where the excuse is "we have to make cards like this". You may write that off as a "me" thing if you wish.

Why would they "have to" make cards like that though?