What do you expect the Pokémon TCG to give you?
- Thread starter Scipio
- Start date
- Status
vanderbilt_grad
New Member
But similarly uncritical support can get people in trouble. It's not disloyal to question why the company (and it's OP support arm) are chaning something that many people liked nor is it "greedy" for them to say that they liked the old way better.
Back to back posts merged. The following information has been added:
Publishing decklists isn't about making people more creative. I have NO doubt that it would have pretty much the same effect in Pokemon that you cite for YGO, with possibly a bit more variance since there are more good cards. But what publishing decklists would do is end the "casual" hiding of decklists. Teams would become a bit less important for events like Cities, but I also have no doubt that they would work very hard to come up with surprises for the big events. Still it would remove some of the current disincentive for the stronger deckbuilders to avoid helping the new players.
As for the separate point about the worlds lists being here ... they are. However there has usually been a tradition for sharing those lists for several reasons. First some of those lists DO get put out in the form of worlds championship decks. Second the format usually changes quite a bit after worlds so there is "no harm" in sharing lists most of the time (this season might be an exception). Third many of these players want folks to see how creative they were even if they didn't quite win.
Last edited:
Varna
New Member
I think that sums up your opinion right there. "It's bad for me, so no." Also, you do have a misconception -
"And how is that MY problem if other people arent capable of breaking the metagame? If I have a list that does that, this means its possible, if people arent capable to do it its not my problem :/"
It is your problem, because secrecy does not grow the game. Secrecy simply promotes the elite staying elite, which is definitely not one of OP's goals.
pat460
New Member
reply in bold, I know wasn't talking to me but I had to step in because of my inner troll. Hes hard to contain sometimes.
DarkMagnus
New Member
growing the game increases sales , increasing the number of events, increases pay out at events, so shouldn't our #1 goal to be to grow the game? and while people complain they want more at there event because growth is up lets get all states having a states first.
DarthPika
New Member
You do realize that every state having a state will never be possible? Not enough people actually live in some of these places. In addition to that, it would be really REALLY unfair to everyone else for these places with only 1/2 good players to have next to no competition.
DarkMagnus
New Member
o so now we are going for whats fair? so its fair to give the elite players more stuff and not spreading out the wealth? its fair to not spread deck lists around for newwer players? seams a contradiction of ideals. all im saying is before people complain they want this this and this because its whats good for them why dont we try and make sure everything is on an even keel such as all states having a chance to represent and what not?
DarthPika
New Member
Yes, it's perfectly fair to do all of that.
1. Elite players get more stuff because we don't make it easier for everyone else to win and have a "feel good" I got a prize mommy moment? Give me a break. If you want the prizes, win more.
2. I spent MONTHS working on, tweaking, testing and perfecting my 9-0 states winning Legos list. Why the heck should it be available to anyone else besides those whom I chose to give it to? Spreading deck lists around for new players is very bad for the game, and promotes laziness (after all, why bother testing if you can just wait for someone else to do the work?), a lack of creativity (see laziness), and contempt from those of us who put a lot of work into building a deck. IMO deck building is one of the most importent aspects of this game, and I am NOT willing to share my hard work with others. Better idea. If new players want a good deck, why don't they just WORK harder and build their own. :/
3. Who cares if states represent? If the state is unable to support a states, then it shouldn't have one. I have to work very hard to do well in my area. I would be very angry to see somewhere like Alaska get a states where it would be very easy for the players there to win. Bottom line is, it is NOT supposed to be easy to win a states.
Sorry for the rant about deck sharing. I'm not sure if others are like this, but I put a lot of time and thought into my decks. I really hate players who think they're intitled to deck sharing because they're too lazy to actually do the work them selves. The total amount of time I spent working on concepts before I even got to my states deck is longer than most people take to pick thier nats deck. In hours, I probably wound up spending several full days working on my deck. To see it just given out for everyone to use would make me sick.
1. Elite players get more stuff because we don't make it easier for everyone else to win and have a "feel good" I got a prize mommy moment? Give me a break. If you want the prizes, win more.
2. I spent MONTHS working on, tweaking, testing and perfecting my 9-0 states winning Legos list. Why the heck should it be available to anyone else besides those whom I chose to give it to? Spreading deck lists around for new players is very bad for the game, and promotes laziness (after all, why bother testing if you can just wait for someone else to do the work?), a lack of creativity (see laziness), and contempt from those of us who put a lot of work into building a deck. IMO deck building is one of the most importent aspects of this game, and I am NOT willing to share my hard work with others. Better idea. If new players want a good deck, why don't they just WORK harder and build their own. :/
3. Who cares if states represent? If the state is unable to support a states, then it shouldn't have one. I have to work very hard to do well in my area. I would be very angry to see somewhere like Alaska get a states where it would be very easy for the players there to win. Bottom line is, it is NOT supposed to be easy to win a states.
Sorry for the rant about deck sharing. I'm not sure if others are like this, but I put a lot of time and thought into my decks. I really hate players who think they're intitled to deck sharing because they're too lazy to actually do the work them selves. The total amount of time I spent working on concepts before I even got to my states deck is longer than most people take to pick thier nats deck. In hours, I probably wound up spending several full days working on my deck. To see it just given out for everyone to use would make me sick.
Varna
New Member
Weren't you just complaining about league prizes "not being available to everyone" in another thread or something? Also, the point is not that the elite players get however much stuff, it's that a system of secrecy helps keep the same people in those spots. This does not benefit a new player.
Deck building is an important aspect. By sharing the lists after the events are over, new players can freely examine these and learn how to build good decks. Not willing to share ideas after the fact is just selfish.
See my first reply. Also, there is no end all method of determining whether or not X area is "more competitive" than Y area. If there was, our rating system would be flawless.
I can understand your feelings about your hard work, but if it's made public only after you've won with it anyways, what's the difference?
prodigal_fanboy
New Member
The issue is that unlike other games like Magic, where lists are shared, the luck factor is much smaller and therefore even if one does net-deck, at high-level tournaments one would still get trounced, being inexperienced with the deck. While that does happen with Pokemon, there's a lot of anecdotal evidence of mediocre players having phenomenal luck and doing it well (albeit not winning it all, barring any examples).
Varna
New Member
I don't see how luck is any less of a prevalent factor in Magic, where there is a phenomenally less amount of draw and search power. Just as many games are determined by your opening hand, and there is a lot more "top decking" involved.
Plus, you mean to tell me that a player who doesn't know what they're doing can pick up a netdeck and beat the pros a good percentage of the time? It sounds like you're discrediting the "skill" part of this game and instead suggesting that it's all simply in the deck you play.
pat460
New Member
The number 1 goal should be fun, followed by whatever your personal second goal is. And, the amount of sales and players has increased over the past few years, whereas the prizes have decreased, so sales ≠ prizes.
So your telling me I should work hard on a list, perfect it, go win a tournament with it and then give it out so someone who hasn't put any work in on it has a chance to win? Seriously? And than its even worse if me a friend came up with it. Come on people I will never support net deckers.
To anyone that doesn't want there winning deck posted after a tourney i have a question. What happens if they decide to publish winning decks from all tournaments? Are you going to quite playing?
Varna
New Member
I doubt it. Knowing the general crowd here, 90% of them are just shooting steam, and if a policy like so was enacted they wouldn't go anywhere, just whine a bunch. See: foreign card policy.
Honestly, yea it pretty True. No body would quit but you would have a bunch of pissed people. Becuase random noobs would get good lists without doing any work.
DarthPika
New Member
I wouldn't quit, but I would be very, VERY unhappy. Here's a thought. I started out this game 2 years ago as a total n00b, having no clue how to build a good deck. What did I do? I looked at the worlds decks (ya, they DO publish some decks) and did a lot of testing trying to figure out what the good combos are like. ON MY OWN, I figured out how consistency often makes for a winning deck. I managed to figure it out with out people's lists being posted after every tourney. Why shouldn't everyone else?
Let's see YOU spend hours working on a deck only to have every net decker on the planet use it at the next tourney. Ya... I don't think you'll be too happy with that.
People work hard to come up with advanced builds and strategies. I see no reason at all why they should be entitled to share that work with people who are too lazy to do the work them selves.
Let's see YOU spend hours working on a deck only to have every net decker on the planet use it at the next tourney. Ya... I don't think you'll be too happy with that.
People work hard to come up with advanced builds and strategies. I see no reason at all why they should be entitled to share that work with people who are too lazy to do the work them selves.
Lol I've spent like 2 months on my Legos build and I wouldn't have the least bit of problem if someone net-decked me. Even more hilarious, I wouldn't even have a problem if someone beat me with MY OWN deck (lol, I must really suck if people beat me with my own deck).
In close, imitation is the most sincere form of flattery
In close, imitation is the most sincere form of flattery
ApachePrime
New Member
Lol I've spent like 2 months on my Legos build and I wouldn't have the least bit of problem if someone net-decked me. Even more hilarious, I wouldn't even have a problem if someone beat me with MY OWN deck (lol, I must really suck if people beat me with my own deck).
In close, imitation is the most sincere form of flattery
I disagree. With luck being a significant factor in this game, getting beat by your own deck means very little about your skill.
prodigal_fanboy
New Member
Luck less prevalent? B-o-3, the ability to mulligan, more dedicated tutor, cantrips, and a larger interaction with the concept of resource-denial and tempo. The whole structure of resource-allocation and objectives within the game produce two very different styles of play.
And please, don't put words into my mouth. It's poor rhetoric and creates shaky arguments. I said that there have been instances of players essentially net-decking and doing well, without much testing or competency of the game themselves. I never said a good percentage, but the luck of starting hands can really piss you out of a game. Even a bad player should be able to roll through with a decent hand against a crap start. I'm not discrediting the skill at all, in that I believe:
It takes skill to play decks well.
It requires playing decks well to playtest well.
It requires playtesting well to optimize lists.
All of these are reflected in an individual's aggregate season performance.
All of which is very labor-intensive.
And as much as you'd like to think of it as doing an individual a favor, it really doesn't. Citing the above three "It..." statements, by handing bad players good decks, they might not appreciate precisely why how they were building or how they were playing makes them bad, ultimately reinforcing the bad habits contributing to a sloppy play-style.
If you think I'm pulling that out of my tail, I conducted an experiment, albeit limited in scope. I took two identical male twins, with only a 3-point difference in IQ, who have been playing card games for the same amount of time. One, I gave decks to use for tournaments and league play. The other, I gave ideas, and access to any cards he wanted for his deck.
The twin given decks had a much better Cities run than the self-teaching twin. However, one of the twins has a better grasp of what makes a deck good, has a greater desire to play now, months later, and will more than likely continue to improve given time.
By giving players the crutch of good lists, they stay mediocre at best. You don't give them a refined, finished product. You let them produce the raw product, and then by working on it with players who are better than they, they refine their product themselves, and become all-around better players on account of it.
- Status