Pokémon TCG: Sword and Shield—Brilliant Stars

Iron Chef Top 8 Challenge!!!

V

Vegeta ss4

Iron Chef Leader
Welcome to the Top 8 and congrats on making it this far. All of you have been awarded special dice from the Pokegym.

Well onto the challenge. This challenge was something that I was going to make in the top 16, but I have decided that I like it in top 8. It turns out this challenge has been done many years ago by the original Iron Chef coordinator, Cyrus. I was disappointed when I found out that this challenge was done already, but sense it was so many years ago I have decided to go ahead and do the challenge.

Here it is!

Challenge is to NOT WIN!!

I know, the opposite of what you want to do, but this is a deck builders challenge, so why not.

So here it is in entirety.

Hatter vs sKizor
Try to tie the game

Eonic vs vaporeon
Try to lose the game via benching

Rainbowgym vs KingPiplup
Try to lose the game via your opponent drawing all six of his or her prizes

Time for Pain vs Matijs
Try to lose the game via decking out

RULES
  • Format is Holon Phantom - Plasma Storm
  • The metagame is basically "beat your opponent", the deck you are facing is the same as, in theory, are trying to create. So whatever your you make, your opponent will be trying to make the same thing albeit using different cards. Remember, your opponent is trying to lose, as are you.(with the exception of the tie game challenge, you and your opponent are trying to tie.)
  • NO BAN LIST-due note, I know the obvious cards for this challenge, so playing 1 Uxie in the deck is NOT Creative.
  • More information to the challenge will be explained

Hatter vs sKizor(tie)
-Remember: the game does not "tie" if one player meets two win requirements, and the other meets one.
-The official rules of the game state that if you tie, then you go on to sudden death. THESE OFFICIAL GAME RULES ARE NULL AND VOID FOR YOUR CHALLENGE.

Eonic vs vaporeon(lose via benching)
-Remember: you still need one basic Pokemon or your deck is illegal.

Rainbowgym vs KingPiplup(Allowing your opponent to draw all 6 prizes)
-Be smart here, how can you make sure your opponent draws all their prizes?

Time for Pain vs Matijs(deck out)
-Think smart, don't just focus on YOUR deck, but also what your opponent will be doing with his build.

Due Date
March 12 1159 PM CST
Late entries, -2 points for every 1 day it is not turned in. Anymore than 4 days it will be marked down as a zero.

As for any questions or CONCERNS about this challenge, let me know.
 
I have a concern for the challenge between vaporeon and myself. The Top 8 Match from Iron Chef 2008 had a Replacement Challenge issued for SuperWooper and Brady1, because the original design of "lose the game via benching" was deemed to be too unoriginal. It amounted to a winner being chosen based on how many Basics they played or just Super Scoop Up, as Cyrus said in the first post of the replacement challenge thread. What are your thoughts? Because the available sets are different, do you think a more creative deck can be made? I'm just curious to know your opinion, is all.
 
Yeah, I saw it but I think with so many more sets to choose from than he did, I think it is quite possible to utilize more creativity. I do NOT think a replacement challenge is needed, but I do understand your concern. Like I said though, Uxie is a no brainer. I could make a stipulation to your challenge, would you be find with that?
 
I'm fine with the current challenge, but if vaporeon wants to make a change, I'll be perfectly okay with that as well. Thanks for the feedback. :) I was a bit worried when I saw that a replacement challenge was given last time, but I agree, there's a lot more creative options for building a deck with HP through PLS.
 
It just seems too easy to lose the game by benching now a days. Also I want to be clear of what you mean my benching. You do mean I must lose having 0 Pokemon in play right? Will I also lose points if I choose to play with one Pokemon? I have a idea of what I want to do but need to know any guidelines.
 
Last edited:
There will be a stipulation, your challenge must consist of atleast a 1/0/1 Stage 2 pokemon. The stage 2 must be utilized.
Also, all basics MUST have no energyless or 1 energy attacks. This eliminates quite a bit of the uncreative decks.
Vaporeon, your challenge is simple, have zero pokemon in play before your opponent does.

Is that better guys?
 
Vegeta ss4 said:
There will be a stipulation, your challenge must consist of atleast a 1/0/1 Stage 2 pokemon. The stage 2 must be utilized.
Also, all basics MUST have no energyless or 1 energy attacks. This eliminates quite a bit of the uncreative decks.
Vaporeon, your challenge is simple, have zero pokemon in play before your opponent does.

Is that better guys?
Click to expand...

Do you have any idea how many basic pokemon you just threw out? There's not many 1-0-1 lines with a basic that doesn't have a one energy attack.
 
Vegeta ss4 said:
There will be a stipulation, your challenge must consist of atleast a 1/0/1 Stage 2 pokemon. The stage 2 must be utilized.
Also, all basics MUST have no energyless or 1 energy attacks. This eliminates quite a bit of the uncreative decks.
Vaporeon, your challenge is simple, have zero pokemon in play before your opponent does.

Is that better guys?
Click to expand...

maybe the pokemon cant use the one or zero energy attack?
 
I dunno, I still don't like this challenge angle...

It's not innovative (porydonk is already a thing in unlimited and almost all the components are workable here) and pretty much every other strategy possible here boils down to that one's equivalent.
 
I'd imagine knowing that knowledge, it would persuade people to go a different route. Which challenge are you talking about in particular?
 
Vegeta ss4 said:
There will be a stipulation, your challenge must consist of atleast a 1/0/1 Stage 2 pokemon. The stage 2 must be utilized.
Also, all basics MUST have no energyless or 1 energy attacks. This eliminates quite a bit of the uncreative decks.
Vaporeon, your challenge is simple, have zero pokemon in play before your opponent does.

Is that better guys?
Click to expand...

The problem with Eonic vs. vaporeon's challenge the last time it was used is that it's so easy to reach the win condition, even with your new stipulations. You want the deck to be "creative," but the deck also needs to be effective. You don't make it clear how you define creative.

Is a 4-4-4 line of Togekiss (Undaunted) with a bunch of Unown Rs and Qs thrown in "creative?" Is a Crobat (Mysterious Treasures) deck "creative?" It's almost impossible to be creative given that the Stage 2 needs to be utilized and your goal is to bench yourself. I think that's what cabd is referring to when he mentioned that this challenge does not lead to innovation. The effective decks turn into Porydonk-type decks (can I get a turn 1 Togekiss with Broken Time Space and attach a DCE?). Even the alternative ways of benching yourself (through Super Scoop Up, Fossils, etc.) aren't exactly "creative."
 
People can be creative, if they go the obvious routes of SSU with junk Arm and multiple draw draws plus supporter draw, that would be VERY uncreative.

I've looked at the cards and I see some potential cards that could be creative. I'm grading creativity and effectiveness with new ideas in mind. Going the route of the obvious will also give then the obvious horrible score. Going a route of something unique and effective will give them a good score. If this format was just 5 sets, I'd understand, but it is a TON of sets to choose from. Creativity is there, the two players just have to seek it.


I do appreciate the concern for this round, you bring up very valid points, but like I said, more sets to choose from=better creativity options.
 
Vegeta ss4 said:
There will be a stipulation, your challenge must consist of atleast a 1/0/1 Stage 2 pokemon. The stage 2 must be utilized.
Also, all basics MUST have no energyless or 1 energy attacks. This eliminates quite a bit of the uncreative decks.
Vaporeon, your challenge is simple, have zero pokemon in play before your opponent does.

Is that better guys?
Click to expand...


Benching is way to easy.


I assume the need to use at least a stage 2 pokemon was only for the benching Challenge?

As for my own Challenge, I only have to build a deck which makes my opponent take 6 prizes right?
I don't have to block my opponent?
 
Yes, it is only for the benching challenge.

Also, yes you need to build a deck that is efficent enough to lose by your opponent taking prizes. Due note that your metagame is your opponent who is doing the exact same thing.
 
psychup2034 said:
The problem with Eonic vs. vaporeon's challenge the last time it was used is that it's so easy to reach the win condition, even with your new stipulations. You want the deck to be "creative," but the deck also needs to be effective. You don't make it clear how you define creative.

Is a 4-4-4 line of Togekiss (Undaunted) with a bunch of Unown Rs and Qs thrown in "creative?" Is a Crobat (Mysterious Treasures) deck "creative?" It's almost impossible to be creative given that the Stage 2 needs to be utilized and your goal is to bench yourself. I think that's what cabd is referring to when he mentioned that this challenge does not lead to innovation. The effective decks turn into Porydonk-type decks (can I get a turn 1 Togekiss with Broken Time Space and attach a DCE?). Even the alternative ways of benching yourself (through Super Scoop Up, Fossils, etc.) aren't exactly "creative."
Click to expand...

Exactly. All it turns into is something like 1-1-1 porgygon with 1-1 accelgor and a DCE or something similar.
 
Before I do it wrong again, I am not supposted to "play" head to head.
Or in other words if it was possible to build a deck who can give away 6 prizes turn 1 or second turn I dont have to worry about an "opponent" who might play cards to stop me? (Mesprit for example)
 
cabd said:
Exactly. All it turns into is something like 1-1-1 porgygon with 1-1 accelgor and a DCE or something similar.
Click to expand...

Vegeta ss4, honestly, I think you just need to specify a ban list instead of relying on an arbitrary/subjective determination of what's creative.

Is Jumpluff (Dragons Exalted) creative? Is Mew Prime Seeing Off Togekiss creative? Is Crobat paired with Victini creative? Instead of having Eonic and vaporeon blindly guess as to what you subjectively think is creative or not, why not make the competition more clear (and fair) by explicitly stating what Stage 2s you find to be not "creative?"

Why not ban Jumpluff, Togekiss, and Crobat instead of saying don't go the "obvious route?" What is "obviously" uncreative to you may not be "obviously" uncreative to your contestants. This is like the coin flip rule all over again. What's obvious in your head might not be obvious to everyone else.
 
Rainbowgym said:
Before I do it wrong again, I am not supposted to "play" head to head.
Or in other words if it was possible to build a deck who can give away 6 prizes turn 1 or second turn I dont have to worry about an "opponent" who might play cards to stop me? (Mesprit for example)
Click to expand...

The metagame for you IS your opponent. Your opponent is creating a deck to do the same thing as you are trying to do with your challenge. Idk if I can honestly get it any more clear than that...Beat your opponent.

Psychup, what's the point of a challenge if I just give them an answer? If I say X cards are uncreative, then what's the point of even having a challenge? The people that have gotten good creativity scores CLEARLY knew what creativity was, something outside the box. If it seems too obviously good and or broken, chances are it is uncreative. If doing X to make Y work with Z, that would be a side of creativity. Honestly, the challenge is definitely a creative challenge...everyone is forgetting what the metagame is as well. The only deck you are facing is YOUR OPPONENTS deck. This alone should give EVERYONE a clue as to what I would deem creative.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top