Pokémon TCG: Sword and Shield—Brilliant Stars

Iron Chef: elite eight challenges/descriptions are UP! (discussion thread)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Cyrus

Cyrus

Iron Chef - Master Emeritus
Elite eight, here are your challenges. I will not announce the specific guidelines of the challenge yet; however, the theme is...

TRY TO NOT WIN

Wait...What? Try to not win?!

Yes, you heard me right.

Try to not win.

CHALLENGES:::

Acutin VS Magnechu: Try to tie the game

SuperWooper VS Brady1: Try to lose the game via benching

Pidgeotto Trainer VS Andceo: Try to lose the game via your opponent drawing all six of his or her prizes

Rainbowgym VS Pooka: Try to lose the game via decking out.


Universal rules (all competitors)-

-Modified format, DP-on.
-Legal deck rules still apply.
-Metagame Assumption: all opponents in this hypothetical metagame are trying to play towards the same goal as you are, in all aspects.
*EX) trying to tie if you're trying to tie, make lists meant to tie/lose in a particular way, etc. In other words, everyone is trying to do the basic thing that you are.
-Metagame Assumption: losing is winning, and winning is losing - that is, since everyone is playing explicitly to lose, it is FAVORABLE for all involved to lose.
*Note: this does not include the "tie the game" challenge, since their goal is to neither win nor lose, but to tie. A tie is the most desired outcome for ALL concerned if that was your challenge.

-Assumption: assume that it is favorable to either tie as quick as possible, or lose as quickly as possible.

-Creativity requirements haven't changed.
-Deck list and card use requirements vary.



-Challenge-specific rules-

Acutin VS Magnechu (tie the game):

-Unless your idea is wild and you explain it, then deck list requirements remain the same. In other words, keep it good.
-Card use is generalized into just "usage"; that is, how well does your overall build contribute to the challenge's goal?
-Remember: the game does not "tie" if one player meets two win requirements, and the other meets one.
*Example: an Electrode uses Explosion. Both players have one one prize left, but the Explosion player lost his last Pokemon. Ergo, a player wins the game, and the goal of tying is failed.
-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.


SuperWooper VS Brady1 (lose via getting benched):

-Your deck list is allowed to be "good" or blatantly "bad." In other words, since your goal is to lose by bench-out (a means that does not require a good ist), I see a strong case for wanting a bad list. Just show me which way you are going in your write-up.
-Remember: you still need one basic Pokemon or your deck is illegal.
-Card use is generalized into just "usage"; that is, how well does your overall build contribute to the challenge's goal?

Pidgeotto Trainer VS Andceo (lose via your opponent drawing all six of his or her prizes):

-Your deck list must still be good. Just remember that here, "good" means forcing your opponent to draw all six of his/her prizes the quickest.
-Card use is generalized into just "usage"; that is, how well does your overall build contribute to the challenge's goal?

Rainbowgym VS Pooka (lose via deck-out):


-Your deck list must still be good. Just remember that here, "good" means you decking out as quickly, consistently, and reliably as possible.
-Card use is generalized into just "usage"; that is, how well does your overall build contribute to the challenge's goal?


If you do not get any of this, then it is your responsibility to clarify with me! These directions should suffice, but if you have any issues, then please let me know...Via PM.


DUE DATE: Sunday, December 14th 2008, at 11:59 PM. Standard late rules of -3 points per every 24 hour period you are late still apply.




GOOD LUCK!!!
 
Last edited:
LOL!
This is very funny!
BTW, this Iron Chef is really becoming a crazy contest.

I don't know how many chances will i have vs Ross but i'll try to do something!!!
 
Three of the four are pretty easy. The forth isn't difficult either, unless there's some other restriction you're looking for...
 
bullados said:
Three of the four are pretty easy. The forth isn't difficult either, unless there's some other restriction you're looking for...
Click to expand...

Thanks for that.

I know what I want to run - it's just a matter of getting the list absolutely perfect, because I'm pretty sure Brian is going the run the same thing that I am. Should be a good match.
 
Like I said, more clarification will come tomorrow. Until then, stay clueless for suspense's sake. ;)
 
If that's all there is to the challenge, and you know that your opponent is also playing for the tie, then it's remarkably easy.
 
SuperWooper said:
Thanks for that.

I know what I want to run - it's just a matter of getting the list absolutely perfect, because I'm pretty sure Brian is going the run the same thing that I am. Should be a good match.
Click to expand...
Omg, this is going to be great. My list is already done (not really....but in my head it is). I'll have to wait and see about creativity though. But lol at this challenge.
 
Huh. Interesting challenge. Does seem kinda easy for the most part, though. Then again, the most obvious solutions to each challenge will probably get terrible creativity scores.
I'll be rooting for the deckbuilder who bested me, of course. Go Acutin!
 
So it begins...Would we get extra points if we met more then one of the challenges (e.g. being benched and tying the match)?

Back to back posts merged. The following information has been added:

Also, because of my challenge, if I win by two ways (e.g. drawing a prize and both players being benched) vs. one way, then do I technically lose?
 
Last edited:
My thought is that the first two are going to be very, very boring decks. Without even thinking, I've already got builds for both of them.

The third is a little more interesting, but not by much. Again, the build is already done on my part.

The forth, IMO, is the most interesting out of all of them, as it requires actual thought and strategy in order to complete. Again, I've got a pretty decent thought process going into it, but there are probably dozens of other ways for getting the same result.
 
Cyrus, as most of us is surely thinking at Regigigas LVX, can you confirm it can KO itself without any addictional effects?
 
Doshi said:
My thought is that the first two are going to be very, very boring decks. Without even thinking, I've already got builds for both of them.

The third is a little more interesting, but not by much. Again, the build is already done on my part.

The forth, IMO, is the most interesting out of all of them, as it requires actual thought and strategy in order to complete. Again, I've got a pretty decent thought process going into it, but there are probably dozens of other ways for getting the same result.
Click to expand...
Building a deck without thinking must take alot of effort. :rolleyes: Anyways, I've already got some techs in my list to ensure a good matchup, espically against what I assume SW will be doing.
 
Can me and Agustin assume that we should be the ones to initiate the tie-for exmaple I should want MY Electrode to tie the game and not HIS, correct?
 
For now I'd say yes. In order for the tie to be achieved, coordination between the opponents is key - however, there's never a guarantee that your opponent's list is even good for tying, so watch out.
 
Brady1 said:
So it begins...Would we get extra points if we met more then one of the challenges (e.g. being benched and tying the match)?

Back to back posts merged. The following information has been added:

Also, because of my challenge, if I win by two ways (e.g. drawing a prize and both players being benched) vs. one way, then do I technically lose?
Click to expand...
Answer John?:thumb:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top