Is it the format that's stale - or the players?

[NoPoke]

its a marketing thing.

each year four sets arrive. So each year four sets should leave (+/- 1). With ten or so sets in the format the cards stay "valuable" for two+ years. Any less and only those with a high disposable income would be able to play.

SP and its super trainers were a leap in power that it is always going to be painful to recover from.

 

[Top Cut Comics]

each year four sets arrive. So each year four sets should leave (+/- 1). With ten or so sets in the format the cards stay "valuable" for two+ years. Any less and only those with a high disposable income would be able to play.

So then why can we cater to that in a different light.

Currently MtG sanctions and RECOGNIZES several different formats. Type 2, vintage, etc...

Why cant we rotate down as needed and open up another format? I am not talking unlimited. I mean like when we had DP-on. That was awsome. Then when we rotate still acknowlege that previous format.

Like qualifiers of sorts. Make it so players have to use various formats for different tournaments.

Maybe I'm not saying it right. Ugh....

If P!P would recognize previous formats, our cards would retain at least SOME of their value for a much longer period of time , while allowing P!P to rotate on the same schedule as Japan. This would keep most players happy. If you dont want to play in the current format, you will at least have options. This would also help PUI get rid of some of their older products in a better manner. If the cards are still playable, they will retain value.

Did I say that right?

Jimmy

 

[espeon200]

Maybe I'm not saying it right. Ugh....

If P!P would recognize previous formats, our cards would retain at least SOME of their value for a much longer period of time , while allowing P!P to rotate on the same schedule as Japan.

Did I say that right?

Jimmy

So basically you're saying that you would like it if there were some tournaments (say Battle Roads and Cities) that were played in an Extended-Modified format where more of the past sets were allowed. For example, say Extended Modified was what modified had been the previous year (DP-on in our current case. MD-on once the next rotation happens). This would mean that players could begin earning their ratings while having less of a loss of their previously played decks, but it would also require players to start thinking about what they wanted to run once States/Regionals/Nationals came around.

I kind of like that idea, but from a marketing standpoint that doesn't help P!P because there's still the issue that the top tournaments aren't going to allow those older cards. Now I can't figure out how to articulate myself. Basically I kind of like the idea, but it has the same problems as the current system and doesn't really do anything to address them.

 

[Scipio]

As I posted in a HUGE post thats now in the article sections now:

AT THE TIME, the format was healthy. AT THE TIME, SP was good but not all dominating. AT THE TIME, we had no clue of DCE being on the horizon (that card got revealed only after worlds, the rotation announcement having been much, much earlier). AT THE TIME...everything was going well.

Cutting out 7/8 sets to get PT or RR-on would've angered a LOT of players, especially more casual ones.

 

[Chairman Kaga]

Pokemon in Japan does block rotation. So do plenty of other TCGs. None of them seem to have issues with the format changing mid-season. Why are we so set on the way we're doing it?

 

[niimou]

Pokemon in Japan does block rotation. So do plenty of other TCGs. None of them seem to have issues with the format changing mid-season. Why are we so set on the way we're doing it?

QFT. As we say at work: Never create more work for yourself. Why is TCPi taking on the headache of juggling all these extra sets when Japan has already figured it out?

 

[Scipio]

Because I doubt many folks around here would appreciate the sudden change. People don't like letting go what they're used to.

 

[Tagrineth]

Pokemon in Japan does block rotation. So do plenty of other TCGs. None of them seem to have issues with the format changing mid-season. Why are we so set on the way we're doing it?

Er... which other CCG(s) rotate mid-season?

UFS used to rotate mid-season and the players hated it.

 

[SLOW DECK]

I propose a MODERATOR close one of these active threads.

We have some that are basically the same rants/topic. Nothing against any of threads, I just think we have some should have joined some of these threads.

Anyone second this?

 

[LegendaryLugia]

Seconded.

seventeen

 

[prodigal_fanboy]

In regards to Kayle's OP, a format can be diverse and remain stale.

Just because I played against four different decks doesn't mean it was enjoyable to do so. The rogue decks that you see tend to either be garbage or capitalize on a contextually strong card. The rogue decks you see, Scizor, Steelix, etc., aren't any more fun to play against, you either have a counter in your archetype and it's a fairly straightforward match, or you don't and suffer the improbable loss dealt to you by TOM.

It's not the fault of the rogue decks or archetypes. Boring wins. It's just that there are only so many viable decks that are capable of contending against the meta at large, and another category of decks capable of doing extremely well given a specific distribution of decks in its pairings.

 

[waynegg]

It's a real shame to see so many people who would rather be lazy and have a deck handed to them than to earn it by creating something of their own that's effective. I guess it's just a shocking reflection of the larger views of society though.

Never before in this game have I seen so many 'good players' when faced with the choice to lead, follow, or get out of the way to choose to follow.

 

[Tyraniking]

Well yea, I totally agree.

The issue for most players is finding a deck that beats Vilegar, SP, and Gyarados.

They can play one of those themselves to beat the others, sure, but what players aren't getting is that there are great decks...they just dont see enough play from good players.

Some decks I think could be very good are Zard, Magnezone varients, Loxchomp and Blazray. But none of them see too much play. There are tons of decks that can be viable. But people dont play them because they know they can count on the big decks to win tourneys.

I try my hardest to play decks that aren't tier 1. I have made some OK records with those decks. Hopefully they'll see more play.

 

[Son_of_Apollo]

I will challenge you to look into the events that were won by something other than the top 4 decks. Ask these questions…
What were the winners record vs the top 4 decks in the tournament?
What did they play against in the top?
Were there drops, DQ’s, scoops, penalties or something else that allowed them to excel?
Were the bad matchups avoided in the later rounds?

Jimmy

1. vs. LuxChomp- 2-0
vs. Sableye- 4-1
vs. Gyra- 0-0
vs. Dialga 0-1 (sudden death)
2. BlazeChompBDK, Gengar, LuxchompDialga, ChenlockBDK
3. no to all
4. I don't consider any of my matchups to be bad

disproven

 

[kwisdumb]

It's a real shame to see so many people who would rather be lazy and have a deck handed to them than to earn it by creating something of their own that's effective. I guess it's just a shocking reflection of the larger views of society though.

Never before in this game have I seen so many 'good players' when faced with the choice to lead, follow, or get out of the way to choose to follow.

You can't blame people for playing the deck that has the highest chance of winning. I'll probably never invent a rogue deck or anything like that, simply because I want to play the best cards in the format and I want to play a deck that gives me the highest chance of doing well. There's nothing wrong with that menality, and there's also nothing wrong with your mentality. People enjoy the game for different reasons, and everyone wants something different out of it.

 

[InnoceNt]

It's a real shame to see so many people who would rather be lazy and have a deck handed to them than to earn it by creating something of their own that's effective. I guess it's just a shocking reflection of the larger views of society though.

Players would play their own decks if those decks could keep up with the metagame. Most rogues these days can't keep up with SP, Vilegar, and Gdos. You just can't really make your own deck that is effective.

 

[LoTad]

Never before in this game have I seen so many 'good players' when faced with the choice to lead, follow, or get out of the way to choose to follow.

Idk what you're talking about. In that respect, this format is exactly like all the past formats. When looking at high level players, about 95 percent "follow" and the remainder "lead". What I mean by this is that regardless of the format, great players are going to choose established decks. Just like now, the bdif's are being played and won with. Just like in the past with plox, speedrill, luxape, gengar nidoqueen, rock lock, lbs, BAR, dragtrode, metanite, whatever. This year, so far, there have been around a dozen well-established, contending decks, along with a handful of succesful rogues: scizor, magnerock, vilechamp, yanmega magnezone, viletar, and wierd lost world varients.

Also, idk how you can think that playing a proven deck is automatically "following" or "getting out of the way". All the best players I know test out creative ideas all the time, but 99 percent of the time, well-known decks win out over slightly-lesser rogue possibilities. You can be creative and a leader even if you play luxchomp. For example, I played luxchomp all through cities with luxchomp, but I played a completely different version each tourny. Just this year I've played in a cities with several decks, including luxchomp with ERL, banette, multiple expert belts, stadiums, BDK, dialga, 3+ junk arms, 2-2 uxie x, 3-1 uxie x, 2 seeker, multiple looker's, mesprit, chatot md, 3 vs seeker, 4 collector, no uxie x, no q, smeargle, chatot md, sp honchkrow, 4 egain, 4 power spray, no aaron's but one palmer's, 3 prem ball, blaziken fb, sableye, multiple judges, drifblim, drifblim fb, mewtwo x, 3 poketurn, I think that's enough....

I'm sure there's plenty more, but my point is that I never consider myself a follower if I'm playing a well-known deck. This is because I am always going to build it my way, creatively, no matter what other people say. I got third in worlds with lbs. Why did I play it? Because after testing all summer with secret and known ideas, it was still the best choice in my opinion. So, I just built it my way to fit my playstyle. I did the same thing when I got 4th in nats with plox. Both of those tournaments I was the last remaining player of the deck I used. That's because I took the known best deck and put 100 percent into it.

It's frustrating when all these self-righteous rogue-players rant about how much they hate netdeckers. Don't group everyone who plays luxchomp into one "follower" category.

Btw, if you play rogues all the time and don't win, you aren't leading anything.

 

[waynegg]

You can't blame people for playing the deck that has the highest chance of winning. I'll probably never invent a rogue deck or anything like that, simply because I want to play the best cards in the format and I want to play a deck that gives me the highest chance of doing well. There's nothing wrong with that menality, and there's also nothing wrong with your mentality. People enjoy the game for different reasons, and everyone wants something different out of it.

The point I was trying to make is that it's on "BDIF" because 80% of the players play it. By sheer numbers it's going to win more tournaments. That also means it isn't necessarily the best deck. If you were to use your mind a bit you could easily make something better. So yeah, there is something wrong with that mentality.

Also, idk how you can think that playing a proven deck is automatically "following" or "getting out of the way". All the best players I know test out creative ideas all the time, but 99 percent of the time, well-known decks win out over slightly-lesser rogue possibilities. You can be creative and a leader even if you play luxchomp. For example, I played luxchomp all through cities with luxchomp, but I played a completely different version each tourny. Just this year I've played in a cities with several decks, including luxchomp with ERL, banette, multiple expert belts, stadiums, BDK, dialga, 3+ junk arms, 2-2 uxie x, 3-1 uxie x, 2 seeker, multiple looker's, mesprit, chatot md, 3 vs seeker, 4 collector, no uxie x, no q, smeargle, chatot md, sp honchkrow, 4 egain, 4 power spray, no aaron's but one palmer's, 3 prem ball, blaziken fb, sableye, multiple judges, drifblim, drifblim fb, mewtwo x, 3 poketurn, I think that's enough....

That's creativity and innovation. That's thinking for yourself and fixing what you need fixed. Not at all what I am talking about, and I'm pretty sure you know that and just chose to be argumentative.

It's frustrating when all these self-righteous rogue-players rant about how much they hate netdeckers. Don't group everyone who plays luxchomp into one "follower" category.

Self-righteous? Personal attack much?

I just don't like people playing lists they have spoon fed to them, camp during tournaments to watch, and get an edge on, upcoming opponents with little if any penalty, and then turn around and try to say how great they are when they had almost nothing to do with their success. It's easy to copy- anyone can do it.

Btw, if you play rogues all the time and don't win, you aren't leading anything.

There are also many measures of success. When I was really active in competitive play I won plenty. Now it's just more enjoyable to go to tournaments and play spoiler to the 'established' unbeatable netdeck.

 

[kwisdumb]

If it performs the best at tournaments and uses the most powerful cards, it's the best deck. I don't see how you can argue differently.

I understand where you're coming from, but I can't help but disagree.

 

[waynegg]

If it performs the best at tournaments and uses the most powerful cards, it's the best deck. I don't see how you can argue differently.

I understand where you're coming from, but I can't help but disagree.

If 80% of the players, at say Regionals, decided to run some half decent LostGar deck, then LostGar would win more Regionals than LuxChomp. Would LostGar then be BDIF? Of course not, it would just be the most played deck and by overwhelming odds it would win more. I'm sorry if you can't see that.

Take the States results for example. If 75-80% of the players played some sort of LuxChomp Variant (Straight LuxChomp, Sablelock, DialgaChomp, etc), then only 16 out of 41 reported Masters results were won by the deck. That's only 39%. With those numbers you should be able to see that your perception is fallacy. Therefor, you'll be no better or worse off playing something you created.

And that's what makes the player pool stagnant. Flawed perception and bandwagoning. You can create something and do well, but the limits you place on yourself with perception don't allow you to realize it.