Ban Mewtwo EX?
- Thread starter Poke Trainer J
- Start date
- Status
Otaku
Active Member
Funny how one can miss a post in a long thread, even one affirmed by others.
Please demonstrate.
Pokemon has had very few cards you play from hand on your opponent's turn, and Switch is not one of them. This was why I pointed out Switch only balanced out a card like Pokemon Catcher in a slower format. Switch and Double Colorless Energy rarely "counter" Pokemon Catcher in a format of OHKOs, especially when those OHKOs can begin first turn and in successful deck should seldom fail to materialize by a player's third turn (which in and of itself is a "slow start").
Double Colorless Energy has many functions, and filling retreat costs is probably the least of them that aren't truly universal (like filling discard costs). If Double Colorless Energy was all about Retreating, why not re-release Warp Energy instead; that does the job of returning an Active Pokemon to the Bench much better. A new Energy that, while attached, lowers that Pokemon's Retreat Cost would also work. Double Colorless Energy was about speeding up the game and the return of an older card (nostalgia).
Switch is not a counter to Pokemon Catcher in a format of OHKOs, I established this before you posted, and you did not refute it. DCE is even less of a counter than Switch; it is less effective even in the event a Pokemon is not OHKOed, and it enables at least some of those OHKOs. Double Colorless Energy, if that is the "solution" you are talking about, is overpowered in most aspects.
For DCE to be balanced, the format must be carefully crafted so that few Pokemon can utilize it for more than Retreating, and those that do rely on it to be as competitive as those that don't. There is some leeway if certain "counter cards" exist, but that is a delicate balance the game has struggled with its entire life cycle and I do not like to rely on it.
Since you insist on repeatedly stating a point your own words, let alone mine, prove false, the primary purpose of DCE is to enable surprise attacks and speedier KOs; aiding in retreating is pretty much a side effect. That or it is perhaps the worst designed card ever, given that what it was intended to do, it instead does the opposite.
Legendary Pokemon have regularly been competitive at different points in the game. This isn't the first time Mewtwo has dominated a format, after all. Many times it has been a "special" version of the card, such as a Pokemon with an owner (Rocket's Zapdos) or a Pokemon ex (Latios ex), but they still had more than 15 minutes of fame. There is a problem with "filler" cards in the game that has often been glossed over because at the time, it wasn't a big deal.
I have made that mistake in my past, of crying "Legendary Pokemon aren't as powerful as they should be!" instead of "Pokemon aren't being well designed!" All fully Evolved Pokemon need to be on more or less equal footing. Should they be identical? By no means! However for years I assumed that I should start with Basics and build up... instead of starting with fully Evolved Pokemon and working my way down.
Legendary Pokemon were just more visible when it comes to design failure because they are so much more potent in the video games. A "bad" (not useful or even interesting) Basic Pokemon of an Evolution is still a design failure and disappointing, but the full burden of seeing play doesn't rest upon it. If the Evolved form is good enough, the "bad" Basic will see play. If an alternative is presented, the entire line may see play without the "bad" basic Pokemon.
When a fully Evolved Basic Pokemon isn't worth playing... it isn't worth playing. It carries the full burden of getting itself into play, unless a particular combo calls for it and allows it to ride on the coattails of another card (perhaps a "Baby" form or a partner like Solrock/Lunatone). This makes the failure in design more noticeable. When it is a Legendary, it it is simply easier to notice.
If they were truly resetting, shouldn't they "simplify" the game by resetting us back to only one kind of Trainer? Or at least do away with Supporters since by their nature they are simply an Item with additional limits on its usage? No, those changes were made for a reason. I often bring up the push for simplification because I understand it and it is in effect; that doesn't necessarily mean I agree with it.
The return to the "old" feel of the game is about nostalgia and, in some days, mitigating some design choices TPC made in the past and have begun to question. It is by no means a mandate; if tomorrow they decided to print and release a few promos designed to return us to an Evolution dominated format, that isn't either; TPC has flipped on us enough in the past that it appears they either don't have a set idea of how the game should run, change their minds frequently, or just have a hard time maintaining what they want.
I suggest caution. I've presented my arguments, and I confess it is hard sometimes to keep my temper; it is easy to mistake misunderstanding for obstinance or even hostility.
I have endeavored to make my points and support them in a logical fashion, barring where it is a matter of preference. You tried, and I am pretty sure I demonstrated how you failed. Yet I am reminded that perhaps you are correct, and your next post will explain things better... so I went through my responses in this post looking for undue snarkiness.
I am accused of sour grapes and whining when most of my post are about explaining my position. Tell me, what sounds more like sour grapes? Listing one's grievances (real or imagined) or being the person mocking such a person? I make no claim of great contributions to this game, but when I have been able I have happily tried to study and share my learning with others.
You tell me to sit it out and keep quiet, or worse to keep quiet and tell others to do the same when I believe the game is being handled in correctly and in a manner that will ultimately damage it, or in the best case scenario keep it far from its full potential. It pretty much is my duty to voice my concerns, provided I do so in an appropriate manner.
I am a customer of this game, the same as you. As long as I follow the board rules, I am allowed to air my opinions on the matter. If TPC decides to listen to me, they decide to listen to me. If they listen to you, they decide to listen to you. If they never hear either of us or choose to ignore us, that is their right.
I have witnessed other games decline and had the same arguments made to me; "Be quiet and either get off or enjoy the ride!" Eventually if Pokemon declines to a certain point, I will leave it be. Until then, I will seek to help it improve.
Since that is my position on a "ban list" for Pokemon I assume you suddenly started addressing someone else here and gave no indicator, or have been lecturing me without knowing who I am (which is no one important, but at least my expressed opinions).
Again, I am confused: you began by indicating you were addressing me and now you are talking about other people's opinions.
You finally state you are addressing everyone, which lends credence that you were addressing me until this point.
You are sick of the complaining and want to focus on the game and have fun, yet you then add your own rants and complaints to the list? Serious question: what if people are trying to play the game and not having fun due to the current rules and card pool? What if their grievances are legitimate? I get tired of it myself but I ask that people not start multiple threads over the same issue; you know, basic board rules.
Some of us can discuss our concerns with the game while still playing, enjoying, and discussing the rest of the game as well.
Please demonstrate.
Pokemon has had very few cards you play from hand on your opponent's turn, and Switch is not one of them. This was why I pointed out Switch only balanced out a card like Pokemon Catcher in a slower format. Switch and Double Colorless Energy rarely "counter" Pokemon Catcher in a format of OHKOs, especially when those OHKOs can begin first turn and in successful deck should seldom fail to materialize by a player's third turn (which in and of itself is a "slow start").
Double Colorless Energy has many functions, and filling retreat costs is probably the least of them that aren't truly universal (like filling discard costs). If Double Colorless Energy was all about Retreating, why not re-release Warp Energy instead; that does the job of returning an Active Pokemon to the Bench much better. A new Energy that, while attached, lowers that Pokemon's Retreat Cost would also work. Double Colorless Energy was about speeding up the game and the return of an older card (nostalgia).
Switch is not a counter to Pokemon Catcher in a format of OHKOs, I established this before you posted, and you did not refute it. DCE is even less of a counter than Switch; it is less effective even in the event a Pokemon is not OHKOed, and it enables at least some of those OHKOs. Double Colorless Energy, if that is the "solution" you are talking about, is overpowered in most aspects.
For DCE to be balanced, the format must be carefully crafted so that few Pokemon can utilize it for more than Retreating, and those that do rely on it to be as competitive as those that don't. There is some leeway if certain "counter cards" exist, but that is a delicate balance the game has struggled with its entire life cycle and I do not like to rely on it.
Since you insist on repeatedly stating a point your own words, let alone mine, prove false, the primary purpose of DCE is to enable surprise attacks and speedier KOs; aiding in retreating is pretty much a side effect. That or it is perhaps the worst designed card ever, given that what it was intended to do, it instead does the opposite.
Legendary Pokemon have regularly been competitive at different points in the game. This isn't the first time Mewtwo has dominated a format, after all. Many times it has been a "special" version of the card, such as a Pokemon with an owner (Rocket's Zapdos) or a Pokemon ex (Latios ex), but they still had more than 15 minutes of fame. There is a problem with "filler" cards in the game that has often been glossed over because at the time, it wasn't a big deal.
I have made that mistake in my past, of crying "Legendary Pokemon aren't as powerful as they should be!" instead of "Pokemon aren't being well designed!" All fully Evolved Pokemon need to be on more or less equal footing. Should they be identical? By no means! However for years I assumed that I should start with Basics and build up... instead of starting with fully Evolved Pokemon and working my way down.
Legendary Pokemon were just more visible when it comes to design failure because they are so much more potent in the video games. A "bad" (not useful or even interesting) Basic Pokemon of an Evolution is still a design failure and disappointing, but the full burden of seeing play doesn't rest upon it. If the Evolved form is good enough, the "bad" Basic will see play. If an alternative is presented, the entire line may see play without the "bad" basic Pokemon.
When a fully Evolved Basic Pokemon isn't worth playing... it isn't worth playing. It carries the full burden of getting itself into play, unless a particular combo calls for it and allows it to ride on the coattails of another card (perhaps a "Baby" form or a partner like Solrock/Lunatone). This makes the failure in design more noticeable. When it is a Legendary, it it is simply easier to notice.
If they were truly resetting, shouldn't they "simplify" the game by resetting us back to only one kind of Trainer? Or at least do away with Supporters since by their nature they are simply an Item with additional limits on its usage? No, those changes were made for a reason. I often bring up the push for simplification because I understand it and it is in effect; that doesn't necessarily mean I agree with it.
The return to the "old" feel of the game is about nostalgia and, in some days, mitigating some design choices TPC made in the past and have begun to question. It is by no means a mandate; if tomorrow they decided to print and release a few promos designed to return us to an Evolution dominated format, that isn't either; TPC has flipped on us enough in the past that it appears they either don't have a set idea of how the game should run, change their minds frequently, or just have a hard time maintaining what they want.
I suggest caution. I've presented my arguments, and I confess it is hard sometimes to keep my temper; it is easy to mistake misunderstanding for obstinance or even hostility.
I have endeavored to make my points and support them in a logical fashion, barring where it is a matter of preference. You tried, and I am pretty sure I demonstrated how you failed. Yet I am reminded that perhaps you are correct, and your next post will explain things better... so I went through my responses in this post looking for undue snarkiness.
I am accused of sour grapes and whining when most of my post are about explaining my position. Tell me, what sounds more like sour grapes? Listing one's grievances (real or imagined) or being the person mocking such a person? I make no claim of great contributions to this game, but when I have been able I have happily tried to study and share my learning with others.
You tell me to sit it out and keep quiet, or worse to keep quiet and tell others to do the same when I believe the game is being handled in correctly and in a manner that will ultimately damage it, or in the best case scenario keep it far from its full potential. It pretty much is my duty to voice my concerns, provided I do so in an appropriate manner.
I am a customer of this game, the same as you. As long as I follow the board rules, I am allowed to air my opinions on the matter. If TPC decides to listen to me, they decide to listen to me. If they listen to you, they decide to listen to you. If they never hear either of us or choose to ignore us, that is their right.
I have witnessed other games decline and had the same arguments made to me; "Be quiet and either get off or enjoy the ride!" Eventually if Pokemon declines to a certain point, I will leave it be. Until then, I will seek to help it improve.
Since that is my position on a "ban list" for Pokemon I assume you suddenly started addressing someone else here and gave no indicator, or have been lecturing me without knowing who I am (which is no one important, but at least my expressed opinions).
Again, I am confused: you began by indicating you were addressing me and now you are talking about other people's opinions.
You finally state you are addressing everyone, which lends credence that you were addressing me until this point.
You are sick of the complaining and want to focus on the game and have fun, yet you then add your own rants and complaints to the list? Serious question: what if people are trying to play the game and not having fun due to the current rules and card pool? What if their grievances are legitimate? I get tired of it myself but I ask that people not start multiple threads over the same issue; you know, basic board rules.
Some of us can discuss our concerns with the game while still playing, enjoying, and discussing the rest of the game as well.
vaporeon
Moderator
Mewtwo EX was released.
That proves nothing.
baby mario
Front Page Article Editor<br><a href="http://pokeg
Just because Pokemon isn't making the game that you (general you) want, doesn't mean they aren't making the game that THEY want.
Mewtwo defined a format for ONE set. That's all. I'll never understand why people are so wound up about it.
psychup2034
New Member
We're going to look back at this a couple years from now and cherish those brief 5 and a half weeks back in 2012 when Mewtwo EX was the best card in format.
Team CREAM
New Member
We're gonna look back at this in a couple of weeks from now and cherish those brief 5 and a half weeks back in March and April when Mewtwo EX was the best card in format. 
Darkrai is where it's against, qurl.
Darkrai is where it's against, qurl.
CMsvW
New Member
I feel like if they tested and saw what cards were good and such. There would be more than 8-10 cards a set that come out that are useful. Power creep wouldn't be as bad as it is. Evolutions wouldn't have been made obsolete. There would be more supporters, trainers, items, stadiums, TMs that come out every set as opposed to the like 6-8 a set we get.
Don't get me wrong, I enjoy the format and do consider it to be pretty good. However, the game could be a lot more balanced and there could be a lot more creativity in decks.
I'm a scrub who's been into the game for only a year now and I notice all this stuff, if there were testers who did this stuff for a living, they would have certainly caught onto this.
TheRolesWePlay
New Member
Power Creep is more or less a necessary evil for TCGs. As much as I dislike the use of the argument, the TCG is a product of a company. If new cards were lackluster then there'd be little point for players to buy new product. Power Creeps are more or less a fool-proof solution. Weather or not it is the best solution is debatable, but it is a stable way to make new cards attractive enough to buy.
As for creativity I think we have plenty of different cards to experiment with. Now weather or not players choose to use them, now that's another story...and another subject.
Poke Trainer J
New Member
Besides people are going to be teching in Darkrai to get around Mewtwo anyway since it has -20
sychic: Resistance which is added to 40 with an attached Eviolite which should weaken the amount of damage X Ball deals greatly. Only problem I see is that people running Mewtwo are going to be packing in Terrakion to get around Darkrai besides Eels.
Otaku
Active Member
I am not completely convinced that power creep is a necessary evil so much as a convenient one. Perhaps it is necessary for the business model Pokemon operates from. Hitting "just the right" power level isn't like throwing a dart at a board; even an idealist like myself accepts that it will have to be a range. So as sets come out, power level will vary a little bit anyway. The trick is to learn from what was a little too weak and what was a little too wrong and not repeat them.
It is a rotating format, and most fans are at least "okay" with good reprint sets. We have a lot of Pokemon to get into the game, and most have specializations. Several even have multiple aspects to cover. It certainly is easier just to allow a power creep, but fine tuning existing mechanics and developing new ones provides enough variety for at least some players to continue enjoying the game.
Simply put TPC has to reset the power creep sometime or "Over 9000" won't just be a Dragon Ball Z joke. @_@ If they reset it often enough and make sure that the sets on the low end of power creep are the innovators, we have a short, cyclical power creep.
This may be a failed business model, and certainly is an intimidating one. Considering most of the profits are made from large scale sales to big retailers (Wal-Mart, Target, etc.) would it really hurt them that they were essentially "re-selling" the game every few years? If you're only a collector it means nothing. Plus, I wasn't kidding - new mechanics would come and go like they already do. It would only be long time players that would have a reason to be annoyed when they pull something and are all "I bought this same card five years ago, but with different artwork and back then it was a Charizard instead of this new guy!"
I mean, even with power creep we kind of already have that.
It is a rotating format, and most fans are at least "okay" with good reprint sets. We have a lot of Pokemon to get into the game, and most have specializations. Several even have multiple aspects to cover. It certainly is easier just to allow a power creep, but fine tuning existing mechanics and developing new ones provides enough variety for at least some players to continue enjoying the game.
Simply put TPC has to reset the power creep sometime or "Over 9000" won't just be a Dragon Ball Z joke. @_@ If they reset it often enough and make sure that the sets on the low end of power creep are the innovators, we have a short, cyclical power creep.
This may be a failed business model, and certainly is an intimidating one. Considering most of the profits are made from large scale sales to big retailers (Wal-Mart, Target, etc.) would it really hurt them that they were essentially "re-selling" the game every few years? If you're only a collector it means nothing. Plus, I wasn't kidding - new mechanics would come and go like they already do. It would only be long time players that would have a reason to be annoyed when they pull something and are all "I bought this same card five years ago, but with different artwork and back then it was a Charizard instead of this new guy!"
I mean, even with power creep we kind of already have that.
Besides people are going to be teching in Darkrai to get around Mewtwo anyway since it has -20
How exactly are decks going to tech in darkrai? It can't attack without darkness energy. You build an entire deck around darkrai, you don't tech it into existing decks.
psychup2034
New Member
Why do you think that power creep is evil? Some people would rather play in a format where the same 8 or so "balanced" decks are in Tier 1/1.5 all year long, Thankfully, those people aren't designing the game.
I'm glad that we have variety in Tier 1/1.5 across the year:
- Fall: ZPST, Reshiphlosion, Megazone, Truth
- Winter: Magneels, Chandyplume, 6 Corners, Durant, Electrode variants
- Spring: Zekeels, CMT, Durant, Troll
- Summer: Zekeels, Dark Toolbox, Zoroark (?), Empoleon (?), etc.
It's ridiculous how some people think power creep is necessarily bad for the game. As long as the game does soft rests every so often (like HGSS), everything should be fine.
psychup2034
New Member
I was using "8 or so" as a figure of speech. My point was that without power creep, certain decks would never cycle out of Tier 1 and we'd have a pretty boring format where one deck is good for years and years. (Without power creep, ZPST would be Tier 1 for 2 years, CMT would be Tier 1 for 2 years, etc. If you're ok with that, then I guess you wouldn't need power creep. However, I think most people like having some freshness in the format in terms of a difference in the variety of decks in Tier 1/1.5.)
Please explain how we get new decks to arise in the format without power creep. If Magneels and Chandyplume were not stronger than ZPST and Reshiphlosion, then how are we going to get ZPST and Reshiphlosion out of Tier 1? If Magneeels and Chandyplume were equally strong as ZPST and Reshiphlosion, then we'd just be adding more decks to Tier 1, not fundamentally changing what's in Tier 1.
From what I can tell, the weakness in your argument is that a format can have both power creep and balance throughout the year. They aren't mutually exclusive.
bullados
<a href="http://pokegym.net/forums/showthread.php?
Psychup: Counter-example. Magic: the Gathering. I'll use a 2-converted-manna cost Red Creature from the Mirage block and from the Scars of Mirrodin block for an example.
You can use just about any example you want. The fact remains that MTG has basically zero power creep over two decades, while Pokemon has had enormous power creep to the point where the original Power Pokemon are no longer even feasible in an Unlimited format.
You can use just about any example you want. The fact remains that MTG has basically zero power creep over two decades, while Pokemon has had enormous power creep to the point where the original Power Pokemon are no longer even feasible in an Unlimited format.
vaporeon
Moderator
This is also why I made the statement that TPC does not test any cards before they release them. In magic, they have what, 4 or 5 formats that they do official tournaments for and Pokemon has 1. Magic was a game made by players for players and to an extent, yugioh. Pokemon TCG is just another byproduct for the brand and nothing more. Its why we have a card like mewtwo ex in format.
If any care was given, they would have realized that a pokemon that can do 40 to 60 damage turn 1 with a energy requirement that 1 energy cards could give AND tested it enough, they would have realized that the card breaks the format.
You still have not proven that TPCI doesn't test cards. Just giving your opinion such as it is.
- Status