Xerneas EX, Yveltal EX, Venusaur EX, Blastoise EX

[espeon200]

When I look at what is wrong and then the pending changes (both to rules and coming cards), the latter don't correct the former; they just might be "less wrong". Not just game mechanics either, but distribution. If this was just the game's second chance (its at least its fifth) and the state of the economy in many places, this may be the point where a lot of us can and should say "Enough!".

And yet, people will still play the game.

It's interesting, coming from the perspective of someone who missed out on the "glory days" of the card game quitting after neo and not starting back until HGSS. I've now played competitively in four different formats (MD-on, HGSS-on, BW-on, current format) with three different turn-one restrictions (player going first can't play trainers, no restrictions on player going first, player going first cannot attack). People have complained about all of those things from time-to-time. This is not an exhaustive list, but here are some of the "controversies" I can remember just off the top of my head.

MD-On was mostly about SP Pokemon, which were powerful basics with a great support engine. There was also the fact that draw was ridiculous with Uxie and such. People quit the game. The game grew.

HGSS-on, had the change of rules to remove restrictions from the first turn of the game (ok, technically that happened when BW released, but it was still in this time frame). Donks increased exponentially. It was alarming and caused mass frustration for players. Also, apart from complaints of too many viable decks we experienced the Lost World freakout where players said they were quitting the game over the hype of cards that had not even been released yet. Evolution decks were viable again, but people complained about that, remembering fondly the days of SP Pokemon. So BW comes along and we see really powerful basics (Reshiram and Zekrom) and players freak out about that. People quit. The game grew.

BW-on switched the tides. while occasionally there would be times when the cardpool supported lots of decks, we went back to having at most four tier-one decks in the format at any time. But, big basics and mostly-free Energy acceleration made some players cry foul. In addition, the lowered number of playable decks cause a fair number of outcries as well. Players quit. The game grew.

Now we see NXD has more of the same, but we're getting new turn-one rules again. Yet, players are frustrated with the game still. Players are quitting. The game is growing.

At what point does this change? At what point do players realize that there will never be a format that makes everyone happy? At what point does the number of players quitting outpace the growth of the game?

 

[mariosss]

This is EXACTLY what I think. People who really love the game tends to adapt to it. But it's like a marriage: sometimes when it's not working, it's better to break up. But the game, as the life, will always go on.

And yet, people will still play the game.

It's interesting, coming from the perspective of someone who missed out on the "glory days" of the card game quitting after neo and not starting back until HGSS. I've now played competitively in four different formats (MD-on, HGSS-on, BW-on, current format) with three different turn-one restrictions (player going first can't play trainers, no restrictions on player going first, player going first cannot attack). People have complained about all of those things from time-to-time. This is not an exhaustive list, but here are some of the "controversies" I can remember just off the top of my head.

MD-On was mostly about SP Pokemon, which were powerful basics with a great support engine. There was also the fact that draw was ridiculous with Uxie and such. People quit the game. The game grew.

HGSS-on, had the change of rules to remove restrictions from the first turn of the game (ok, technically that happened when BW released, but it was still in this time frame). Donks increased exponentially. It was alarming and caused mass frustration for players. Also, apart from complaints of too many viable decks we experienced the Lost World freakout where players said they were quitting the game over the hype of cards that had not even been released yet. Evolution decks were viable again, but people complained about that, remembering fondly the days of SP Pokemon. So BW comes along and we see really powerful basics (Reshiram and Zekrom) and players freak out about that. People quit. The game grew.

BW-on switched the tides. while occasionally there would be times when the cardpool supported lots of decks, we went back to having at most four tier-one decks in the format at any time. But, big basics and mostly-free Energy acceleration made some players cry foul. In addition, the lowered number of playable decks cause a fair number of outcries as well. Players quit. The game grew.

Now we see NXD has more of the same, but we're getting new turn-one rules again. Yet, players are frustrated with the game still. Players are quitting. The game is growing.

At what point does this change? At what point do players realize that there will never be a format that makes everyone happy? At what point does the number of players quitting outpace the growth of the game?

 

[PKM4]

Just FYI the top 2 decks in Masters for Northern California Regionals in a best of 3 format with 50 minutes in Swiss were Darkrai and Blastoise.

 

[HoLoN_TrAiNeR]

Does anyone remember any complaint about formats from the ex ruby and sapphire-ex power keepers era?




Me neither.

 

[Swordfish1989]

Does anyone remember any complaint about formats from the ex ruby and sapphire-ex power keepers era?




Me neither.

I think to be fair, the number of people who have the ability to access the internet and afford a computer is much higher now than it was in the early and even mid 2000's. There's also the fact that at that point a lot of us were still kids who didn't think as critically about the game as we do now. Oh and I'm pretty sure we have more players now than we did at that time.

 

[rileysill32]

Guys, I think we have all come to the common agreement on this matter.
Pokemon since Ruby Sapphire has released a power creep that has gone to far.
I don't think it is ANY coincidence that is the exact same time that Nintendo bought the rights to the Pokemon franchise.

But as I said, it is a majority shared opinion that Pokemon is becoming too "awe powered". Look at this card that is so powerful blah blah blah.
And the trend only keeps getting bigger and bigger. I wish it would end, I really do.
If I had my way with it, the HP cap would be back down to 120, there would only be 1-3 Pokemon in the format capable of doing damage over 100.
No ex's, no power up cards, nothing of the sort. It is also a common opinion shared that you should be able to walk into ANY tournament around the world
and be able to compete with the deck in hand if it has a consistent and well play tested strategy.
What avenue pokemon takes to get there, is unknown, will they ever, also unknown. But does the majority of the competitive tcg scene agree we need to change the way
the game is designed and ran? Yes. I bid you all good.

 

[JandPDS]

Guys, I think we have all come to the common agreement on this matter.
Pokemon since Ruby Sapphire has released a power creep that has gone to far.
I don't think it is ANY coincidence that is the exact same time that Nintendo bought the rights to the Pokemon franchise.

But as I said, it is a majority shared opinion that Pokemon is becoming too "awe powered". Look at this card that is so powerful blah blah blah.
And the trend only keeps getting bigger and bigger. I wish it would end, I really do.
If I had my way with it, the HP cap would be back down to 120, there would only be 1-3 Pokemon in the format capable of doing damage over 100.
No ex's, no power up cards, nothing of the sort. It is also a common opinion shared that you should be able to walk into ANY tournament around the world
and be able to compete with the deck in hand if it has a consistent and well play tested strategy.
What avenue pokemon takes to get there, is unknown, will they ever, also unknown. But does the majority of the competitive tcg scene agree we need to change the way
the game is designed and ran? Yes. I bid you all good.

I agree wit h most of what you said, but Nintendo invented Pokémon both the video game and the TCG, it was never acquired. What you are confusing is that Nintendo contracted Wizards of the Coast to print and distribute Pokemon TCG to the world outside of Japan. And to run the Organized play there as well. Everything went well until Hasbro bought out Wizards and attempted to force all older pokemon players into playing Magic.

At this point the game went into a tailspin and only recovered when Nintendo fired Wizards/Hasbo an decided to run everything themselves.

 

[mahius]

This is why I only collect cards and just play matches with close friends and family. Still these changes affect me a a consumer as some cards are more expensive due to people wanting them for their decks. That said, I paid £13 ($20) for a Genesect EX FA and just a tenner ($16) for normal Genesect EX. Both were mint. It's not all bad as you can see but this is post-hype, most people have their Genesects and Virizions now so of course the prices would be lower. I would have loved to see more low HP EX cards like Jirachi EX. And Jirachi EX is actually a good card too.

 

[Otaku]

And yet, people will still play the game.

...and?

The Pokémon TCG could keep itself going with zero people playing the game; as long as people buy boosters, distributors can still sell boosters to stores, and thus said distributors will continue to buy from the source (and the game will keep going).

Be careful not to confuse correlation with causation; the Pokémon TCG has both an animation and a video game tie to feed the desire for product... not playing the game, but "Oh that is Pokémon so I want it!". From a seller's point of view, the advantage of a TCG is it can sell as trading cards or as a game. A game can make a lot of money if it can keep "new" customers coming in faster than it loses the "old" ones.

So if the game keeps growing... that doesn't mean it is good. You brought it up yourself; you plan on sticking around and seeing it through. Guess what? Been there, done that. I stuck by the game through the initial fad "crash". I stuck through the game transitioning from WotC to Nintendo. I've long been the guy who remained due to "waiting things out".

Its been almost 15 years. I've given them enough time to fix things. I'll stick around long enough to see if X&Y look like they are on the right track, and if they are I'll part amicably. If not, I'll need to know that it is still on a bad course so that I can warn others like me not to be sucked in.

 

[signofzeta]

TPC has no problems with selling cards. Anybody can sell cards so long as it looks nice. Look at hockey cards for example. The problem is with the emphasis with the Game in trading card game.

I can totally compare trading card games to video games. A video game has a single player component and a multiplayer component. Trading cards have the collecting and the playing aspects. The collecting aspects is to single player, while the game aspect is to multiplayer. Pokemon TCG is a video game where the developers took the longest time in developing the single player aspect, and the multiplayer is a last minute addition, and not a lot of work is put into it. I kind of feel Pokemon TCG is like this. Does TPC even go through vigorous R&D and playtesting in order to create the game as much as WOTC does with Magic? Of course there are multiplayer only video games. Those would be like those trading card games that aren't meant to be collectable, like, uh, Dominion.

 

[TheRolesWePlay]

Just no strategy or originality in deck construction or the game anymore.

This is something I feel needs to be addressed. This isn't necessarily the fault of the game designers. There are options in the game, in fact there are plenty, and I'm not just talking Darkrai variants. Right now I'm playing a W.Kyurem/Emboar deck that does fairly well, sure it isn't perfect (partly due to personal choice on card selection) but it plays well against mainstream decks, notably Darkrai, and Genesect. There are options, and I'm pretty certain that with the nerfing of catcher it COULD get a lot better.

However, ever since SP-era (I'd say GG, but that was legitimately different), I've noticed innovation with deck building drop off, and it isn't the fault of the game. People have in general been resorting to using cookie cutter decks, and play testing specific match-ups and rarely break the mold, instead of experimenting with other cards. For example I haven't seen a single deck (aside from mine) attempt to utilize Emboar, even though it has a very usable card pool such as Reshiram, Victini EX, Reshiram EX, both W.Kyurems, Mewtwo EX, etc. There are exceptions to this as there are certain people that experiment with seemingly ridiculous deck ideas and prove successful with them.

 

[Otaku]

This is something I feel needs to be addressed. This isn't necessarily the fault of the game designers. There are options in the game, in fact there are plenty, and I'm not just talking Darkrai variants. Right now I'm playing a W.Kyurem/Emboar deck that does fairly well, sure it isn't perfect (partly due to personal choice on card selection) but it plays well against mainstream decks, notably Darkrai, and Genesect. There are options, and I'm pretty certain that with the nerfing of catcher it COULD get a lot better.

I will not deny that no matter how well designed the card pool, the players can wreck game balance by simply refusing to use all the resources available. If you wish to make that case, you'll need to be more convincing, however. Right now you remind me of how I'd cobble together a second class deck that essentially did what a top deck did but not as well, all things consider. So please explain why, besides trading weakness to Genesect EX decks for Weakness to Deluge decks, your deck represents a significant "option".

If things were better balanced, this could be a significant option... but they aren't. Also if Pokémon Catcher is ruining the deck, you're doing something wrong. I don't know about you, but when I try to set up an Evolution the real problem is all those fast, hard hitting Basic Pokémon. Pokémon Catcher may be used to score the hit, but it isn't the problem; eliminating it may protect your Benched Pokémon but you trade one problem for several more.

 

[TheRolesWePlay]

I will not deny that no matter how well designed the card pool, the players can wreck game balance by simply refusing to use all the resources available. If you wish to make that case, you'll need to be more convincing, however. Right now you remind me of how I'd cobble together a second class deck that essentially did what a top deck did but not as well, all things consider. So please explain why, besides trading weakness to Genesect EX decks for Weakness to Deluge decks, your deck represents a significant "option".

If things were better balanced, this could be a significant option... but they aren't. Also if Pokémon Catcher is ruining the deck, you're doing something wrong. I don't know about you, but when I try to set up an Evolution the real problem is all those fast, hard hitting Basic Pokémon. Pokémon Catcher may be used to score the hit, but it isn't the problem; eliminating it may protect your Benched Pokémon but you trade one problem for several more.

Without going into detail of my deck (I'm just defensive of my decks online ) I will say that I use W.Kyurem EX from Boudaries Crossed. My personal deck aside, there's still other approaches to consider with it, such as a Reshiram centralized deck that utilizes Silver Bangles and HTL to OHKO EXs while offering fewer prizes to your opponent in return.

In regards to Catcher issues, I was alluding to what I talked about in the New Rules thread. I find that in general the major problems I have in this format with evolutions is Darkrai/Kyurem smacking them on the bench and then a using a Catcher to KO it subsequently cripling my energy flow if I don't have anything to get around it, and I figure that most evolutions suffer similar issues.

I'm not trying to deny the basic-centric meta (personally I don't have an issue when Stage 2s/1s play a more supportive role), I'm just trying to say that there are plenty of ignored opportunities, and people are quicker to blame TPCi than actually inspect their options. Personally I find the deck pool to be more diverse and interesting than several past formats (HGSS comes to mind), but that's neither here nor there.

 

[vaporeon]

I feel the same way as well. The game needs more creativity. I'm playing a deck with Articuno EX, Zapdos EX and Moltres EX and its working fine for me. My only real matchup problems is blastoise.