Ways to Approach the Game

[vaporeon]

I play the deck that I feel is going to give me the highest chance of winning the tournament, with a list that gives me the highest chance of winning the tournament. There's nothing wrong with this.

The article that Magnechu posted is really what should've ended the thread.

also lol @ bragging about top 8ing a Cities or "always making the top tables" when you've played in four smaller-than-states-level tournaments.

Stop acting all high and mighty. He ask me what have I won or place hight at expecting me to say I did not place high. It is very unfortunate that I donb't get the chance to play in tournaments. I mostly play with friends or weekly tournaments. but it's all the same and metadecks are used. Don't let the confuse my skilkl level.

---------- Post added 05/09/2011 at 06:02 AM ----------

How do you not remember the premier level of FOUR tournaments that just happened this season?

I have not played this season.

---------- Post added 05/09/2011 at 06:04 AM ----------

That list is nowhere near my list.

 

[baby mario]

Stop acting all high and mighty. He ask me what have I won or place hight at expecting me to say I did not place high. It is very unfortunate that I donb't get the chance to play in tournaments. I mostly play with friends or weekly tournaments. but it's all the same and metadecks are used. Don't let the confuse my skilkl level.

It's not the same at all.

You can't say how good a player or a deck is until it is proven in major tournaments against quality opposition.

I've won local tournaments with fun decks that I know would go 0-X at States.

Not saying that you aren't a good player, just that you don't know until you have proven it against the best in a competitive environment.

 

[ShadowGuard]

I think playing original decks is very importing for the game. If everyone just went for the BDIF, the game would become extremely boring. Well, actually, it is in some areas.

However, a player shouldn't just play a deck for the sake of being individual, or even just for the sake of playing one's favorite Pokémon. Netdecking a meta deck doesn't require skill, but playing some random cards doesn't either. Finding a deck that is new or uncommon, but still wins with the right list is what makes a good player. Many World Champions in history won with non-meta decks. Many completely new decks made great achievements, may it be Beedrill, Torterra or even Gyarados when it was unknown before. Personally, I give a lot more respect to people who win with there own decks, than people who win with meta decks.

Depending on the format, it may become difficult to get a non-meta deck running well. In DX-on, we got the Holon Engine that made almost any deck run. 2008 I won states with Togechomp, 2009 with Blaziken or Porygon-Z, but after that, it became more and more difficult to find something that can face SP and other overpowered decks. There is some point where you are forced to play tier 1 decks if you want to do well - and that is exactly the definition of the point where a game is broken and something has to be done. Pokémon hasn't reached that point yet, but is very very close. I hope the HGSS-on rotation will shake things up.

 

[vanderbilt_grad]

Look, I play non-standard decks all the time ... but that's because I like to, not because I think that archetypes are bad. I have no issue with standard lists or the folks who play them.

Deckbuilding is a skill, but it's frankly over valued here on the Gym. Creativity is good, but it's not really the main point of the game.

 

[Cyrus]

Yeah, I think in all this discourse you have to be careful. Although playing to win is a crucial aspect to games, it's oftentimes not the main reason.

My main reason to play this game is to HAVE FUN; my secondary reason is to WIN. If I am winning without fun, then it is a game that I am not playing for the game's sake anymore.

Fortunately, Pokemon has allowed for the two to be linked to one-another; creativity (fun) is important to achieving victory, and the thrill of a good win (or an unusual loss) is tied to enjoyment of the game. That's why it's insane to hold a philosophy that's anything but "uhh, somewhere in between."

 

[vaporeon]

It's not the same at all.

You can't say how good a player or a deck is until it is proven in major tournaments against quality opposition.

I've won local tournaments with fun decks that I know would go 0-X at States.

Not saying that you aren't a good player, just that you don't know until you have proven it against the best in a competitive environment.

Yeah, it is all the same. A GG deck plays all the same in a weekly tournament like it does at worlds. A Luxchomp deck plays the same at Battle Roads as it does it States.

---------- Post added 05/09/2011 at 12:02 PM ----------

I think playing original decks is very importing for the game. If everyone just went for the BDIF, the game would become extremely boring. Well, actually, it is in some areas.

However, a player shouldn't just play a deck for the sake of being individual, or even just for the sake of playing one's favorite Pokémon. Netdecking a meta deck doesn't require skill, but playing some random cards doesn't either. Finding a deck that is new or uncommon, but still wins with the right list is what makes a good player. Many World Champions in history won with non-meta decks. Many completely new decks made great achievements, may it be Beedrill, Torterra or even Gyarados when it was unknown before. Personally, I give a lot more respect to people who win with there own decks, than people who win with meta decks.

Depending on the format, it may become difficult to get a non-meta deck running well. In DX-on, we got the Holon Engine that made almost any deck run. 2008 I won states with Togechomp, 2009 with Blaziken or Porygon-Z, but after that, it became more and more difficult to find something that can face SP and other overpowered decks. There is some point where you are forced to play tier 1 decks if you want to do well - and that is exactly the definition of the point where a game is broken and something has to be done. Pokémon hasn't reached that point yet, but is very very close. I hope the HGSS-on rotation will shake things up.

I do agree with that but I don't just put together a random 60 card deck. Yes, out of my 4 decks I will play the one I have a higher chance of winning with. If I want to play with my favorites, which is why I play Pokemon, I will no matter how bad the card is and make it work for be the best way I know how while keeping te metagame in mind. The SP format was hard for me but I got a working list from Leafeon out of it and now I play cards I would never play like Seeker.

You know at a tournament when I could have donked him and choose not to and let him setup. Reason for that was because I went to play and wanted to play full games. He told me thanks for giving me a chance. Did I go to win, yes I did, could I had lost, yes I could have but that's not how I wanted to win. That's what the game should be about. If I can hold the value of the Spirit of the Game so high like that, I expect others to do so as well.

---------- Post added 05/09/2011 at 12:07 PM ----------

Yeah, I think in all this discourse you have to be careful. Although playing to win is a crucial aspect to games, it's oftentimes not the main reason.

My main reason to play this game is to HAVE FUN; my secondary reason is to WIN. If I am winning without fun, then it is a game that I am not playing for the game's sake anymore.

Fortunately, Pokemon has allowed for the two to be linked to one-another; creativity (fun) is important to achieving victory, and the thrill of a good win (or an unusual loss) is tied to enjoyment of the game. That's why it's insane to hold a philosophy that's anything but "uhh, somewhere in between."

I agree with you as well. I play for fun first, the to win but I still play to win all the same. It makes me fell good when I win with a list I made and it also makes me feel good when I lose to a list I did not see coming but I hate playing against a deck, knowing how it works, see all the moves coming and not being able to do anything about it.

 

[espeon200]

The thing about the initial question asked by the OP is that fully adopting either of those mentalities (I play only the top deck / I play only rogue decks) will put you in scrub territory. Remember, a scrub is anyone who puts self-imposed limits on his of her playstyle. There just as much of a limit in "I play LuxChomp just like X player because it's the best deck" as "I will not play anything that another player has done well with." That said, there are people who adopt both those mentalities that do extremely well at tournaments. The biggest trick you have to overcome when dealing with these kinds of self-limits is not expecting everyone else to have the same limits as you. In order to beat meta, you have to know exactly how to play meta in your sleep and know that your choice does handicap you. You also have to know exactly WHY you choose not to play archetype or to only play archetype. The last ting, and biggest, is that you need to know why each and every single card is in your deck. If the deck you are playing is one you can't play well, it doesn't matter what deck it is because you're always going to lose.

I guess I'm trying to say that I'm seeing a lot of hate for one approach or the other on the Gym, back and forth, and I think it's a stupid thing to argue about. If you want to play archetype or if you want to play rogue are both fine approaches, and most players will end up somewhere in the middle because it's not as black and white an issue as players make it out to be.

 

[baby mario]

Yeah, it is all the same. A GG deck plays all the same in a weekly tournament like it does at worlds. A Luxchomp deck plays the same at Battle Roads as it does it States

Disagree. Bigger Premier tournaments = better lists and more skilled players. I don't consider playing some local random with Luxchomp the same test as playing a top player who is using the deck.

I guess I'm trying to say that I'm seeing a lot of hate for one approach or the other on the Gym, back and forth, and I think it's a stupid thing to argue about. If you want to play archetype or if you want to play rogue are both fine approaches, and most players will end up somewhere in the middle because it's not as black and white an issue as players make it out to be.

Agree. The great thing about Pokemon is that we can all enjoy it with whatever approach suits us best. My only problem with Vaporeon is his hyper aggressive and extreme stance in calling people unfair cheats for using meta decks. People should be able to play the way they want without facing abuse and snobbery from either side.

 

[cabd]

Disagree. Bigger Premier tournaments = better lists and more skilled players. I don't consider playing some local random with Luxchomp the same test as playing a top player who is using the deck.

A good example of this was Battle Roads at Morgan Hill, California for me. I got third place (in masters) with blastoise/feraligatr. Does that makes blastgatr top tier? No, it means that there were few "good" players there. In fact, there was only one SP player, the rest of the filed was random stage two decks like ursarang/typhlosion, other feraligatr variants, an energy-using variant of gyarados SF, and some random shaymin/yanmega builds.

In fact, the SP player took home the win, and I got third, beating out:

Electivire FB / Shaymin / Garchomp C

Mirror

Typhlosion Prime / Ursaring Prime

and losing to:

DialgaChomp with 1-1 Blaziken FB

 

[Magnechu]

I agree with you as well. I play for fun first, the to win but I still play to win all the same. It makes me fell good when I win with a list I made and it also makes me feel good when I lose to a list I did not see coming but I hate playing against a deck, knowing how it works, see all the moves coming and not being able to do anything about it.

Emphasis mine.

If you can see all the moves coming, why are you not able to do anything about it? If your deck is built right, and you know what's coming, you SHOULD be able to do something about it: that's the whole point of building and playing a good deck.

 

[vaporeon]

The fact is that a Luxchomp player is going to play the same no matter what tournament he's in.

---------- Post added 05/09/2011 at 08:39 PM ----------

Emphasis mine.

If you can see all the moves coming, why are you not able to do anything about it? If your deck is built right, and you know what's coming, you SHOULD be able to do something about it: that's the whole point of building and playing a good deck.

I guess that Luxchomp player could have beat Vilgar. He knew Vileplume was there but could not stop it, making him lose the game.

 

[LoTad]

There's nothing wrong with playing a deck that has proven to be succesful. It's just sensible decision making. I test out rogue ideas all the time, but generally, I end up resorted to an already well-established archetype. It seems to me that those who only use rogue decks pride themselves in their creativity and resistance to conformity. But we're forgetting that pokemon already requires a ton of creativity to play succesfully. Even if you're at the extreme end of the spectrum: netdecking card for card, the only way you'll be able to win is through creative thinking processes.

Even in a standard luxchomp mirror match, one of the more straight-forward matchups to play, if you really think about it, the players who are able to extend their thought process the furthest and think outside the box the most are able to see things their opponents can't, giving them a huge advantage. The number of options available to you at any given time combined with the possible outcomes that can occur looking just one turn ahead makes Pokemon a game of creative thinking. Any one point in any pokemon game is different than any other one point in any other pokemon game you'll ever play.

No, netdeckers are not soulless zombies hell-bent on nothing else but winning. They also love creativity because they continue to play pokemon.

 

[PokeDad]

Yes, it is obvious that your chances are better entering a major tournament with a tournament tested best deck in format, and likely there will be a number of people playing it, which increases the likelihood that the deck will win.

My son grindered into Worlds twice, both times playing netdecks,

My son values the city medals, BR Winner cards, and Regional trophy he won with decks he built himself far more.

I am not saying rogue is better, but there is something purer, more fun in it to me.

It may be more league appropriate than major tourney win oriented, but I enjoyed the rogue decks of days past more than seeing a small handful of netdecks, all proven, all top tier, at tourneys now.

If I was teaching people how to play, I would avoid mentioning netdecking as long as possible.

 

[vaporeon]

@ LoTad

Why do you keep going back to netdecking after trying rogue? This tells me you have no confidence in your ability to make a good list. There is almost no creativity while playing the game. The creative part is deck building, the main part of the game. It's not creative to drop a Luxray GL X to take the last prize of your opponent. It's also not creative to drop a Uxie and draw 7 cards.

No, netdeckers are not soulless zombies hell-bent on nothing else but winning. They also love creativity because they continue to play pokemon.

Can you prove that to me? You netdeck because its your only win condition or because you want to win. They don't love the creatitive part of the game because they skip it all together. There is nothing creative about netdecking. The creative part is deck building. It's looking at what cards you like and then getting it to work.

It makes me sad to see post made by people who say 'I will on play what wins'. Thats not getting involved with the game.

---------- Post added 05/10/2011 at 02:18 PM ----------

Yes, it is obvious that your chances are better entering a major tournament with a tournament tested best deck in format, and likely there will be a number of people playing it, which increases the likelihood that the deck will win.

My son grindered into Worlds twice, both times playing netdecks,

My son values the city medals, BR Winner cards, and Regional trophy he won with decks he built himself far more.

I am not saying rogue is better, but there is something purer, more fun in it to me.

It may be more league appropriate than major tourney win oriented, but I enjoyed the rogue decks of days past more than seeing a small handful of netdecks, all proven, all top tier, at tourneys now.

If I was teaching people how to play, I would avoid mentioning netdecking as long as possible.

In responce to that. I maybe should restate what I said. Playing rogue is not better. You play the way you know how. A prize is a prize but those you win based on your own skill and own deck design, you value more then anything else.

A win is a empty win if you play to win at any cost.

 

[Hamster]

@Vaporeon: You have a lot of nerve coming onto a site like PokeGym, whose primary purpose is the exchange of deck building information, and insulting a large proportion of its members with one presumptive, ignorant statement after another. This is the equivalent of going on eBay and saying everyone is a freaking hoarder, to McDonalds and calling everyone a fat tub of lard, to a hospital and calling everyone a cripple, to a school and calling the students stupid, or to a police station and saying the officers are cowards. If you can't accept the fact that TCG’s operate on the basis of dominant archetypes, then the competitive aspect of this game isn't for you.

I'm a UG member and I can tell you for a fact that the discussion that goes on in those forums never ends with someone using the exact list from an article at an event. I know several others who have accounts as well (big event winners this season), and the extent of UG input into their decks was minimal, limited to certain card counts and tech choices, yet it clearly had a significant impact on their performance. It shows Pokemon is based on skill, deck building, and match ups, and it's preposterous to pretend any one of these variables are irrelevant when they all share an equal role in defining the outcome of a game.

That’s my first and last post on the topic.

 

[Victory Bell]

A win is a empty win if you play to win at any cost.

Who the heck in Pokemon or in this thread "Plays to win at any cost"? I hope that "you" is a general "you" or I find that a little insulting.

 

[Yoshi-]

Emphasis mine.

If you can see all the moves coming, why are you not able to do anything about it? If your deck is built right, and you know what's coming, you SHOULD be able to do something about it: that's the whole point of building and playing a good deck.

Have you ever played against SP ?
I know everything thats coming in advance but because sp is all about opening hands and topdecks it doesnt matter.

 

[vaporeon]

@Vaporeon: You have a lot of nerve coming onto a site like PokeGym, whose primary purpose is the exchange of deck building information, and insulting a large proportion of its members with one presumptive, ignorant statement after another. This is the equivalent of going on eBay and saying everyone is a freaking hoarder, to McDonalds and calling everyone a fat tub of lard, to a hospital and calling everyone a cripple, to a school and calling the students stupid, or to a police station and saying the officers are cowards. If you can't accept the fact that TCG’s operate on the basis of dominant archetypes, then the competitive aspect of this game isn't for you.

I'm a UG member and I can tell you for a fact that the discussion that goes on in those forums never ends with someone using the exact list from an article at an event. I know several others who have accounts as well (big event winners this season), and the extent of UG input into their decks was minimal, limited to certain card counts and tech choices, yet it clearly had a significant impact on their performance. It shows Pokemon is based on skill, deck building, and match ups, and it's preposterous to pretend any one of these variables are irrelevant when they all share an equal role in defining the outcome of a game.

That’s my first and last post on the topic.

One, I have been on this site 4 years longer then you. Two, I'm not making ignorant statements. All your other relations are just down right bad. No civil person would do that. You can't compare netdecking to someone dying in the hospital. All you're doing is protecting own self-interest.

There is nothing wrong with exchanging deck building information but when you have post like " Help my Sabledonk, need help with Luxchomp and or Vilegar, help my GG deck for states" it says a lot about its players. I like to think of Deck Help as a section to help people with their deck idea, not something to get help with a deck that already have 5 or 6 different threads elsewhere.

 

[tehlizard]

I bet I can walk circles around you in a game.

It's a gentlemens challenge!

 

[vanderbilt_grad]

Vaporion, what you argue simply isn’t true.


People play Pokemon for many different reasons, but primarily because they enjoy some aspect of the game.

Some people might play because they enjoy being competitive. They get a thrill from trying their playing skill against another person. The deck they play may or may not matter at all to them, but winning is the main thing. These folks will use net decks, creative decks, achetypes, or rogue as needed to win.

Other people might play for social reasons. Their boyfriend, girlfriend, kids, or buddies might play and so they do to so that they can have a shared activity with these folks. They might not really care about winning and losing … or they might only care about winning specific games.

Various folks, particularly younger kids, might play because they enjoy a particular Pokemon or the Video Game and only play the TCG as an extension of that.

Some people love deckbuilding and the creativity it encourages. You seem to be one of them. You like to play your creations and do well with them. That’s fine and I don’t think anyone would have a problem with you doing so … if you weren’t telling everyone that your way of enjoying Pokemon was the one right & true way. You are actually DISCOURAGING diversity by insisting on this.


Further in a competitive event there is another layer. While people may play for many different reasons the event is designed to have a winner and to reward both that person and others who also did particularly well. On a strictly functional level the event is designed to have only one “win condition.” While league and other casual play may reward creativity directly, competitive play does not … unless that creativity translates into competitive advantage somehow.


Finally, regarding Net Decking, it’s a fundamental part of the game. One of the best way for brand new players to learn the finer points of deck building is to borrow from other people. They “steal” the decklists from sites like then and then play them. Ideally they will try different kinds of decks built by different folks and start to see what works and does not work for them. Eventually, if all goes well, they internalize these ideas and get to a point where they can build their own good lists. However NOT EVERYONE HAS THIS TALLENT. Some people are good at playing but not so much at building. We’ve had plenty of event champions where this was the case. On the other hand there are some fantastic deckbuilders that can’t play particularly well. Really different folks have different strengths. It’s somewhat cruel to stigmatize those who might lack the creative talent just because of that.

Further even good players Net Deck. As Darth Pika noted when you are testing your own creation it’s almost necessary to pick other peoples lists to test against. Good players do that all the time, especially if they don’t have a lot of friends or teammates or family members to do live testing against. Again this isn’t a sign of lack of creativity, it’s a practical response to circumstance.


I’m a father. I’ve encouraged my kids to play the TCG for many reasons. I’ve wanted them to learn more sportsmanship based on Pokemon’s SOTG. I wanted to encourage their competitiveness in a way that shows them that working hard can be rewarded. I’ve hoped that their creativity will be sparked by building their own decks and coming up with their own ideas. None of these are mutually exclusive by nature.