Would we be better off with a constant number of legal sets?

Discussion in 'TCG News & Gossip Discussion' started by yoshi1001, Dec 21, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. yoshi1001

    yoshi1001 New Member

    I was thinking (very dangerous, I know), and I was thinking that one disadvantage of the current system is that the pool of cards available at the start of the season is considerably smaller than the number of cards available at the end of the season. I then thought that we could have the new set push the oldest set out of modified when it is released.

    Any thoughts?
     
  2. Scipio

    Scipio New Member

    It'd work, but one problem would be the constant dropping of sets on the other side, and how people would cope with that. Ofcourse, since you'll know how long the sets will be modified that is something you can prepare for...interesting idea, not too certain how it'd work out.
     
  3. drrty byl

    drrty byl New Member

    I think we should have the same format as Japan: FRLG-on.
    This would:

    1) Eliminate the need for Japanese players to adapt their lists to the antiquated "rest-of-the-world" metagame for world championships, putting everyone on a more even playing field. I can only imagine how difficult it will be for them to let go of the holon engine for worlds this year.
    2) Encourage larger event turnout. I know of at least a couple people who have hordes of cards from older sets, and given the chance, would probably play in at least one or two tournaments during a season if they could. Who knows, maybe they'd even start playing in tournaments regularly afterwards.
    3) Dramatically increase deck building options and consistency. A lot more creativity and less "hot new card" decks built by the flavor of the new set.
    4) I personally think more diverse deck building options and larger events would make the game more fun.

    Obviously there is significant marketing motivation to keep the brisk non-JP set rotation scheme in place for the purpose of boosting new release sales. What PUI should realize however, is that since cards in the new sets are typically so much more blessed than those from older sets (ie - more powerful attacks, calculated vs. X2 weakness, 1 prize lv.Xs vs. 2 prize EXs) that is motivation enough for players to purchase the new sets. In addition, it would give them the opportunity to do larger print runs of each set with the knowledge that demand would be longer-lasting and not capped to "about 12-16 months till the next rotation". PUI is convinced that an element of fashion is necessary to garner its Wal-Mart retail marks, but this just isn't the case. People will buy the new cards because they're better, not because they aren't allowed to use the "old" sets.
     
  4. chriscobi634

    chriscobi634 New Member

    i like drrty byl's idea. will it happen? most likely not. I like Yoshi's idea as well but that too will probably not happed. But here are a few thoughts i've been thinking about on how our metagame is formed but the big guys:

    Why is it determined by them? We the fans pay the money for the cards, we go to their events, we are keep the game going. Yet every year they manage to **** people off with some of the decisions they make without any input from us the fans. Many people will make the argument that if I don't like the way things are ran then leave. Well I can't. I love Pokemon too much to just simply walk away. So I stay and deal with it. Another thing is how the cards are designed, which also sets the tempo of the metagame. Perfect example is this year's format. It went from being a T2 format to a little bit more set up format all in one set. And it was mostly a few cards. I'm not saying that I could do a better job then those guys, but one thing I would like to do is know or at least think i have some input. It's rather easy to take polls to see what people would like most. If it's not feasible then give a brief explanation on why not. Don't just leave us wondering why it couldn't be done.
     
  5. Lawman

    Lawman Active Member

    One issue with yoshi's idea is the PTOs and TOs having to explain to Little Johnnie or Jane's Mom & Dad that cards that were legal at the last tourney may not be legal at this level tourney....and do this after every level change of events! Think about it....before CCs, we got a new set. Before States, we will get a new set. With 4 sets a yr and similar changes in tourneys, the field is in flux already. IMO, it is easier to tell parents (as a PTO) that these sets are legal now, we will add X # of sets before Worlds and then there will be a rotation at ONE time, not thoughout the year.

    Keith
     
  6. Regis_Neo

    Regis_Neo Moderator

    I've always agreed that we and the world should follow Japan's format. It eliminates any oddball mishaps, allows for greater creativity (and let's face it, the argument that no one will buy new cards since they have old ones is BS since the new ones are considerably stronger) and overall I think would make playing the Pokemon TCG consistent around the world and easier to keep track of.
     
  7. Aggy&Co.

    Aggy&Co. Member

    If it was FRLG on then I would assume people would buy the older sets as well as the new ones. Either way PUI gets the sales they are looking for. I have only been at this for 2 years and I hate losing value on cards I spend a lot of money obtaining.
    Surprise to PUI I have not bought any boxes of the new sets because they torched the value of my collection. I'm buying the next though but only if it has Darkrai, Garchomp leafy and glacie. Until then I'll muddle along with trading and buying small pack quantities.

    Why not make it FRLG on and make the whole world have the same ability to build decks of their choosing?
     
  8. sdp

    sdp New Member

    The Pokegym forum itself is proof that players can't cope with the slightest change in the format.

    The server would crash.
     
  9. yoshi1001

    yoshi1001 New Member

    I agree that it would be more difficult, particularly initially, but I think the benefits would be worth it. Besides, we already have to remember that the new set becomes legal, so it's not that much of a stretch to remember that the old set is no longer legal (though that would be using logic, another dangerous thing :wink:).
     
  10. PokePop

    PokePop Administrator

    Knowing that a new set is legal is not anywhere as easy as knowing when a specific set drops. With this change, the format would drop a set every three months. Possible also a POP set and/or a Trainer set.
    You may dismiss the "non-pro"s difficulty with keeping up or understanding it, but from the TO/HJ side of things, that is far from a trivial concern.
     
  11. yoshi1001

    yoshi1001 New Member

    You can't have change without having change, Pop. :wink:

    As I said, I do envision that the start-up costs would be considerable, but it might be worthwhile in the end. Do consider that the changes, while more numerous, would also be less dramatic.

    Also, note that I'm not necessarily advocating employing such a system, just stating it as a possible alternative.
     
  12. NoPoke

    NoPoke New Member

    I don't think that a fixed number of sets would be a good idea. It might be workable if the number of allowed sets was large, say 15, but I'd still prefer an alternative way of keeping the card pool large. Why? Because removing sets always has the risk of making a deck no longer modified-legal it is much better to have such disturbances only once a year. Whereas adding sets does not make existing legal decks invalid.

    On a related note I do think that released sets should last a minimum of two years before rotation. Legend Maker had a rather short modified legal life :( A short shelf life is not good for vendors.
     
  13. Magic_Umbreon

    Magic_Umbreon Researching Tower Scientist, Retired

    ^ I agree but LM is a special set; the exs dominated every season they were playable. Mew ex and Banette ex have consistently been in Worlds-winning decks or at least a threat to decks.

    I think if sets were more even in contents it would be fairer.
     
  14. drrty byl

    drrty byl New Member

    And I can't think of any other reason as to why PUI would rotate sets more quickly than in Japan but to boost sales of newer material in the large retail market (Target, WAL-MART, etc.) by encouraging turnover, which, let's face it, is where most of their earnings come from. It seems ironic that they're actually hurting small vendors by doing so. And it seems odd that eliciting the "sorry ma'am, your son can't play with these cards: they're too old. Go over there and buy one of those theme decks for him to use.." response would be a key component in the Pokemon-TCG marketing paradigm.

    What makes no sense at all though, is that they spend such a significant chunk of money translating and reprinting cards in English and other languages only to burn their shelf life faster than the sets in JP! I work in a printing-related industry, and can say with absolute certainty that translating, bilingualizing, or trilingualizing large amounts of printed material is not cheap. And to do so with the acute need for detail and in such large quantities as is the case with Pokemon cards seems a rather nightmarish task. Dumping the sets faster (and thereby killing their consumer demand) minimizes PUI's potential earnings on money invested in translation and reformatting.

    There are hidden costs involved in rotating sets so quickly (to players, small retailers, and PUI) that likely outweigh the perceived added profits of doing so -- which PUI doesn't perceive.
     
    Last edited: Dec 31, 2007
  15. Cyrus

    Cyrus Iron Chef - Master Emeritus

    Drrty Byl speaks the truth. Therefore, I give his suggestion the Kettlero Bros.' "stamp of approval."
     
  16. yoshi1001

    yoshi1001 New Member

    One possible benefit of the "constant number" system is it might make the future metagame more predicable (no more guessing what sets will be rotated each year).

    I think the problem of a smaller card pool is more acute this year because of the large number of sets rotated out at the start of the season.
     
  17. A problem with that is what about noobs? They would get SO confused about what was legal and not, not to mention the constant changing of the little things on deck lists that say whats legal and shows their symbol.

    Besides, i kinda like having the pool constantly growing then shrinking. It makes it harder, you have allot more to look at meaning more options and sometimes one person won't think of an older card, but you notice it and build a deck with it and own em.
     
  18. yoshi1001

    yoshi1001 New Member

    Currently there are seven full sets legal in modified (HP, CG, DF, PK, DP, MT, SW) and three POP sets (4, 5, 6), one trainer kit, and a handful of black star promos.

    Also, remember that every official tournament decklist form contains a list of legal sets for that event. While this doesn't help if people bring in a handwritten decklist (and creates a problem for event levels held at different times in different regions), it does provide an authoritative source of information.
     
  19. Articjedi

    Articjedi Active Member

    You'd be suprised how many people who show up to tournaments actually keep themselves updated. This is just a big can of worms.
     
  20. yoshi1001

    yoshi1001 New Member

    You mean Wurmple, right?

    Sorry.

    I'm kinda surprised that there's so much resistance to a change like this, given the amount of griping about a lack of depth in the format. :wink:
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page