Japan's time called procedure... why not that way here?

[JandPDS]

The best part of the Time called = one more attack for each player rule is that it will really go a long way to discourage stalling. Right now towards the end of the game a player with the lead can slow play in the hopes of time being called when it is their turn and the game ending in their favor. But if it is know that the other player will also get one last chance to attack the stalling strategy will not be as effective, so that should lead to less instances of it occurring.

 

[bulbasnore]

I only wonder why nobody did find out about that earlier?

Immense language barrier. Thank goodness for Tego & others who bring information to this forum. All the more amazing since English is not his native language either! Again, thanks Tego, for your many many contributions.

Lia, I love how you have found Occam's Razor on this question - Game Rules vs. Tourney Rules. I'd like to go back to that dividing line, though... Game Rules do not specify time limits... its only the tourney rules that do. Am I missing something there?

But, let's discuss it on merit alone:

I go first - time is called on your turn - so, I also go last.

Is that ok, as it offsets my 'no trainer, supporter, stadium' turn 1?
Is that not ok, as the card play prohibition is designed to offset my advantage in going first?

What do you and everyone think?

 

[mewsmom]

Actually I don't think it is a language barrier thing- I think it's something Japan has recently changed and then because of language barrier or them just not updating us- we didn't know the difference. This surely would have come up at any of the previous World's.

I do feel it will be very beneficial to the game. My hubby has started many of conversations and threads on how to defeat slow play and eliminate it. This procedure here sounds like the answer. No one will want time to end on their turn, they'll want it to end on their opponents so they get in one more turn, so there's no reason to try and control time and cause it to end on your turn.

Now there will be some games that it will have to go further than just the one turn, which then will give you the true winner of the game and not a winner who got a bad win in the examples previously given.

 

[Ryuzaki]

I thought this was already widely known? I knew...its definitely a better system and doesn't even take much adjusting to the current system. I can understand why +x may be difficult for some to follow but 1 turn each is just so fair.

 

[dogma]

How a tournament is run is upto the OP, which is different in Japan as the OP run under POP USA.
So Japan can run Single Elimination while we have Swiss, I don't see any problem in that.

But there should be no difference in how games rules are applied.
If the rule in Japan is: time called -> current player finish turn -> between turns effect - opponent gets a last turn
we should have that also.
It's just like the "take a card/no card as first player", No trainers/supporters on first turn of first player.
We had to adapt those game rules, so if this +1 turn ruling is the official way of playing in Japan it should be a matter of time we get it. (and the sooner the better I would say)

I only wonder why nobody did find out about that earlier?

Finally, finally someone has got to the real issue!! I thought I was just mad! I thought this was the main issue at the very beginning when all of these threads have popped up, but no one mentioned it. (Because I don't play, I thought I was missing the point since noone else seemed to raise this point)

This is absolutely the issue. Why on earth is such an international game not standardised throughout the world? Why are there different OP systems? Different formats? Different promo cards? Different timing for sets? Different products?

It just makes no sense. I see other games manage to translate their products in all sorts of languages, and still have one system for all. Pokémon does it in a very weird way; it creates double work for its subsidiaries, and it makes me mad that just because I'm not Japanese, I have to miss out on all of these things.

There isn't even an attempt to level the playing field. I just find it very strange. And now, there is finally a very good reason for the competitive players to care about the same issue.

Banning GG, time limits, formats... it's all the same thing. POP is an inferior system to what Japan enjoys, and there is absolutely no reason why it has to be that way.

Immense language barrier. Thank goodness for Tego & others who bring information to this forum. All the more amazing since English is not his native language either! Again, thanks Tego, for your many many contributions.

Lia, I love how you have found Occam's Razor on this question - Game Rules vs. Tourney Rules. I'd like to go back to that dividing line, though... Game Rules do not specify time limits... its only the tourney rules that do. Am I missing something there?

But, let's discuss it on merit alone:

I go first - time is called on your turn - so, I also go last.

Is that ok, as it offsets my 'no trainer, supporter, stadium' turn 1?
Is that not ok, as the card play prohibition is designed to offset my advantage in going first?

What do you and everyone think?

OK, there's lots of points made here, so I hope this makes sense:

- You're right, there is an immense language barrier. I have lots of respect for people like Tego and Lia who post on this board with information, even if this isn't your primary language.

This is only an issue because we are forced by incompetence to find information from other sources, i.e. Japan. There should be no 'other sources'. There should be one OP, and one company consistently making decisions.

- Either you have misapplied the term Occam's razor, or I just don't understand what you're saying. If anything, it has little to do with whether time limits are a game or tourney rule (obviously it is a tourney rule!!). It has to do with why we are forced to play with a secondary system the cards were not designed for?

- The merits of the rule change is not something I can pretend to understand. See what I did there people? I know when I don't know something and then don't pretend that I do...

Sorry about the ranting. It just really really annoys me that we are in this mess for no reason whatsoever...

d

PS: Yes, a lot of the above was also about the collecting side as well. But there have been great strides in making our sets contain more and more of the promos from Japan. That doesn't mean we don't deserve what the Japanese fans get

 

[ryanvergel]

Interesting perspective, dogma.

You make some cool points.

 

[dogma]

Cheers. I stayed out of all the drama recently because I wanted to collect my thoughts.

I didn't realise I had all that pent up inside me!

 

[Lawman]

If the Japanese use +1 for end time situations, it sounds like a winner to me. It helps to eliminate slow play and stalling, hoping the last turn ends on their turn. How many times have we heard "That's time pokemon players" ....the GG player goes....oh, OK, teleportation w/ Gardy X and bring down (insert oppo's poke) FTW". Now, if the other player can snipe right back, we are back into SD.

Keith

 

[ColdCoates90]

I highly doubt it was because of the language barrier that we did not know of this ruling. PUI has ways of communicating with Japan's organized play leaders, I just think Japan didn't enforce it upon us and let us go with how we've been doing things. Usually whatever Japan says will override ours, as it has been seen in the past.

If you think about it though, we can't have exactly what Japan does all the time due to stuff like movie releases coinciding with particular sets(promos too for that matter).Not to mention they distribute certain things a lot differently than how ts done here. They have(had?) a reward system where you could turn in points for certain rare cards and quick construction packs and what-not. These have to be introduced creatively into the US like secret rares(TSD) or make entirely new sets(Emerald).

Additionally we might as well not be under one big organized play, it would be too much trouble and the people in charge of PUI would still run everything in the USA in the long run I think.

 

[G-Dog4377]

If you think about it though, we can't have exactly what Japan does all the time due to stuff like movie releases coinciding with particular sets(promos too for that matter).Not to mention they distribute certain things a lot differently than how ts done here. They have(had?) a reward system where you could turn in points for certain rare cards and quick construction packs and what-not. These have to be introduced creatively into the US like secret rares(TSD) or make entirely new sets(Emerald).

Additionally we might as well not be under one big organized play, it would be too much trouble and the people in charge of PUI would still run everything in the USA in the long run I think.

This is a good point here, that it is difficult for us to have what Japan has all of the time because things are done differently outside of Japan. What I would like is for everything to be synchronized. Set releases, movie releases, reward systems, and all other aspects of pokemon would be the same worldwide. That would eliminate the problems described by ColdCoates, and we would have our sets and movies at the same time as everyone else so that there is no differences in the metagame for anyone.

This is absolutely the issue. Why on earth is such an international game not standardised throughout the world? Why are there different OP systems? Different formats? Different promo cards? Different timing for sets? Different products?

It just makes no sense. I see other games manage to translate their products in all sorts of languages, and still have one system for all. Pokémon does it in a very weird way; it creates double work for its subsidiaries, and it makes me mad that just because I'm not Japanese, I have to miss out on all of these things.

This is only an issue because we are forced by incompetence to find information from other sources, i.e. Japan. There should be no 'other sources'. There should be one OP, and one company consistently making decisions.

Exactly. One worldwide system, no other systems that work differently. Other companies can do it easily, and I'm not just talking about other card games. Why can't Pokemon do it?

 

[Sandslash7]

If the Japanese use +1 for end time situations, it sounds like a winner to me. It helps to eliminate slow play and stalling, hoping the last turn ends on their turn. How many times have we heard "That's time pokemon players" ....the GG player goes....oh, OK, teleportation w/ Gardy X and bring down (insert oppo's poke) FTW". Now, if the other player can snipe right back, we are back into SD.

Keith

My friend who was at Nats told me he heard 5 people within 3 seats of him say: "Level Up, Bring Down, Game."

In 1 Round.

That's just crazy...

I'd be in favor of syncing our end-game rules to Japan's.

 

[ColdCoates90]

This is a good point here, that it is difficult for us to have what Japan has all of the time because things are done differently outside of Japan. What I would like is for everything to be synchronized. Set releases, movie releases, reward systems, and all other aspects of pokemon would be the same worldwide. That would eliminate the problems described by ColdCoates, and we would have our sets and movies at the same time as everyone else so that there is no differences in the metagame for anyone.

Thats extremely hard to dual release those things in two different countries, and they would lose a lot of money on the potential customers lost because they couldn't put the film or pokemon cards out fast enough.

In short: not cost effective ,they lose money doing this.

Things are running quite well in my opinion. A lot of these suggestions aren't even realistic if you try to understand why they aren't already doing what is suggested.

 

[Rainbowgym]

Immense language barrier. Thank goodness for Tego & others who bring information to this forum. All the more amazing since English is not his native language either! Again, thanks Tego, for your many many contributions.

Lia, I love how you have found Occam's Razor on this question - Game Rules vs. Tourney Rules. I'd like to go back to that dividing line, though... Game Rules do not specify time limits... its only the tourney rules that do. Am I missing something there?

But, let's discuss it on merit alone:

I go first - time is called on your turn - so, I also go last.

Is that ok, as it offsets my 'no trainer, supporter, stadium' turn 1?
Is that not ok, as the card play prohibition is designed to offset my advantage in going first?

What do you and everyone think?

Who or what is Occam's Razor?? I am not familiar with that name.
Did I explained it wrong?
In that case I will try another way, but it's hard to explain in English.
Tourney rules are the ones a TO has "influence"on. Time is one of them also are the amount of rounds.
You can do 45 minutes best of 3 , game 30 minutes, swiss with top cut or without, 1 round less whatever as long it's according the OP tournament rules.
But a TO doesn't have influence on HOW a game/winner is decided, that's a game rule which is explained/worked out in the tournament rules.
We have several, like drawing all your prizes, having no Pokemon left.
There is NO TO who can chance that, neither as a TO could chance a ruling "when it's time you follow XX procedure"'.
We have game rules who are telling exactly when a game goes on time what to do. Opp + 1 turn is such ruling.
point 18.7.1 of the tournament rules can be chanced to adjust to the game rules.

btw the tournament rules are to be used in conjunction with the most recent Pokemon TCG GAME rules, doesn't that say it all??

Finally, finally someone has got to the real issue!! I thought I was just mad! I thought this was the main issue at the very beginning when all of these threads have popped up, but no one mentioned it. (Because I don't play, I thought I was missing the point since noone else seemed to raise this point)

This is absolutely the issue. Why on earth is such an international game not standardised throughout the world? Why are there different OP systems? Different formats? Different promo cards? Different timing for sets? Different products?
I will try, Different OP system are not really the problem because they are running independent from each other (and most likely because there are no players hopping from Japan OP to USA OP, except Eskill LOL
Different formats, well that's something I also never got. Why are our sets rotated so fast? Oke I can understand it takes a few weeks to translate a brand new set, but we had 1 release at the same time as Japan. Most likely it has to do with schedules of other parts of the Pokemon Brand. If the video games are not released (who contain XX new Pokemon) we also won't get the cards with that pokemon.
About the difference in timing/products and Promo cards, I prefer to think somebody at PUI says "this we don't need, this we need" and that's why we do or don't get some items/cards.

It just makes no sense. I see other games manage to translate their products in all sorts of languages, and still have one system for all. Pokémon does it in a very weird way; it creates double work for its subsidiaries, and it makes me mad that just because I'm not Japanese, I have to miss out on all of these things.
Let's say the Japanese headquarter isn't really about GLOBAL thinking, just look at the release of the video games and you will know what I mean.

There isn't even an attempt to level the playing field. I just find it very strange. And now, there is finally a very good reason for the competitive players to care about the same issue.
Yes there is, we had game rulings adjusted once we as Player or POP or TC found out Japan used a different way/mechanic/ruling. But most times this occured during/before Worlds when both parties meet. Or when people as Rya translate new sets and point on differences.

Banning GG, time limits, formats... it's all the same thing. POP is an inferior system to what Japan enjoys, and there is absolutely no reason why it has to be that way.
I don't think the USA OP system is inferior, it's different and designed for another public. Also (and I know some people will not be happy when I say this) OP is only there because it's a kind of sales mechanic. It's not designed for the players, it's designed to boost sales by having players using product. The OP team will do what they can to make it good for the players, but if it was only for the players their team would contain much more people. They have to show that their budget is worth it by raising sales. A very fragile/difficult position imo.
For example if rotating sets much faster as Japan makes money, they will rotate, no matter what players think about that. the game will survive with a larger format (so cards can be used longer) but will the sales numbers??



PS: Yes, a lot of the above was also about the collecting side as well. But there have been great strides in making our sets contain more and more of the promos from Japan. That doesn't mean we don't deserve what the Japanese fans get
As collector I never liked the differences, Being in Europe makes that feeling even worse. We have almost no access to Japanese material and on top of that most English Promocards aren't even released here.

I hope this explains a bit, but it's my personal point of view. I can be wrong about some things regarding why OP is like it is.
But no matter how I look at it, I prefer to have equal OP outside Japan more than I prefer to have the same OP as them.
My first goal always was the have the same structure/tournaments/whatever for each country who is joining the "USA OP", adjusting to the Japanese structure is a later concern if needed. Playing the game and following the game rules as made in Japan is more important than having their tournament structure.

 

[Lawman]

Occam's razor (sometimes spelled Ockham's razor) is a principle attributed to the 14th-century English logician and Franciscan friar William of Ockham. The principle states that the explanation of any phenomenon should make as few assumptions as possible, eliminating those that make no difference in the observable predictions of the explanatory hypothesis or theory. The principle is often expressed in Latin as the lex parsimoniae ("law of parsimony" or "law of succinctness"): "entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem", roughly translated as "entities must not be multiplied beyond necessity".

This is often paraphrased as "All other things being equal, the simplest solution is the best." In other words, when multiple competing theories are equal in other respects, the principle recommends selecting the theory that introduces the fewest assumptions and postulates the fewest entities. It is in this sense that Occam's razor is usually understood.

Originally a tenet of the reductionist philosophy of nominalism, it is more often taken today as an heuristic maxim (rule of thumb) that advises economy, parsimony, or simplicity, often or especially in scientific theories.

There you go Lia! The principle of Occam's Razor.

Keith

 

[JandPDS]

Occam's razor (sometimes spelled Ockham's razor) is a principle attributed to the 14th-century English logician and Franciscan friar William of Ockham. The principle states that the explanation of any phenomenon should make as few assumptions as possible, eliminating those that make no difference in the observable predictions of the explanatory hypothesis or theory. The principle is often expressed in Latin as the lex parsimoniae ("law of parsimony" or "law of succinctness"): "entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem", roughly translated as "entities must not be multiplied beyond necessity".

This is often paraphrased as "All other things being equal, the simplest solution is the best." In other words, when multiple competing theories are equal in other respects, the principle recommends selecting the theory that introduces the fewest assumptions and postulates the fewest entities. It is in this sense that Occam's razor is usually understood.

Originally a tenet of the reductionist philosophy of nominalism, it is more often taken today as an heuristic maxim (rule of thumb) that advises economy, parsimony, or simplicity, often or especially in scientific theories.

There you go Lia! The principle of Occam's Razor.

Keith

So, Lawman, in your Opinion; if William of Ockham was alive today would be be in favor or opposed to changeing our Time called proceedure to match the way that Japan is currently doing it? :wink:

 

[yoyofsho16]

SUPER GOOD IDEA:
You should have to write down who got the first turn, so that at the end, if it is that person's turn, THEN the other player gets the one more turn. However, if it is the turn of the person who went second, the game ends after their turn.

That way, everybody gets the same amount of turns in the end.

 

[JandPDS]

SUPER GOOD IDEA:
You should have to write down who got the first turn, so that at the end, if it is that person's turn, THEN the other player gets the one more turn. However, if it is the turn of the person who went second, the game ends after their turn.

That way, everybody gets the same amount of turns in the end.

No that is not the why it works in Japan. It does not matter who went 1st at the beggining of the game.
Whenever Time is called, whoevers turn it is finishes that turn. Then the other player gets the chance to draw one more card and finish one more turn. Then if one player is ahead on prizes the game is over, if not you move onto sudden death.

Here when time is called, it also does not matter show went 1st at the beggining of the game. Whnever time is called, whoever s turn it is finsihed that turn. Then if one player is ahead on prizes the game is over. if not you move onto sudden death.

Thoes are the two proceedures now in use for ending a game called on time. Japans way is much more fair then our way. And this thread is about why is our proceedure so differnt then Japan's when we match them lock step for how a gme is supposed to start. If we start the same way shouldnt they end the dame way also?

Oh and watch yourself as it appears that there is some Old Ham guy running around with a Razor; so be carefull out there!!!

 

[yoyofsho16]

I didn't say that is how they did it in Japan, I just think it would make more sense that way. If the first person was the last one to take a turn, then that means they got one more turn then the other person total.

 

[G-Dog4377]

So, Lawman, in your Opinion; if William of Ockham was alive today would be be in favor or opposed to changeing our Time called proceedure to match the way that Japan is currently doing it? :wink:

If I understood that explanation correctly, he would be in favor of matching the procedure to Japan. Example:
Two people are playing a game. One is using Empoleon and one is using Gardellade. The prizes are tied when time is called on the Gardellade player's turn, so he scores an easy KO with Bring Down on a Piplup. With the non Japanese way of doing it, this is a win for the Gardellade player, because it is assumed that because the Empoleon player is losing at this specific moment in time, he cannot pull out a win. Under the Japanese procedure however, no such assumption is made and they give the Empoleon player a chance to either keep the game going into sudden death or win it right there. Naturally, the Empoleon player could potentially do a Surf Together KO for sudden death or even Dual Splash two pokemon for KOs and win it, which contradicts the non Japanese assumption, and in my opinion, provides a more accurate result.

 

[Lawman]

IMO, Occam's rule of thumb means you go with the standard way and the simpliest way also. IF Japan has done the end of game (timrd games of course) this way for awhile, and since they are the creators, we should follow their way. Of course, having the game end on time call and finish that turn IS simple also, but not always FAIR. I prefer the japanese way and if it was that way, I would have beaten Fulop @ the 2004 Eastern Regional, made top cut and maybe I finish 2nd in the worlds that year and not him!

True story, without a draw ag'st me, Fulop does not qualify for top cut and advancing there to get an invite to Worlds in FL 2004. He was behind the whole game and slow played it until the end when time was called. He took the tying KO and the 1 point draw. I was powered up to counter ANY move he made with a KO to retake the lead (and the win, under Japan's way of doing the end of time method).

Keith