Pokémon TCG: Sword and Shield—Brilliant Stars

Boring can be Better

Status
Not open for further replies.
Of course I'm going to gauge a players skill on the amount of tournament wins they have. What SHOULD I base a players skill on, how nice they are and how big their Lv. X collection is? Amount of wins in Pokemon is the equivalent to "keeping score" in other games, and usually the person with the higher score is better.

As for not calling someone an idiot, that's idiotic. Obviously if you're going to say something stupid like hyping up Porygons and Honchkrows in MY thread, I'm going to try and stop it. Because of you, at least one little kid reading my thread got the idea for a Honchkrow/Porygon Z deck. He played it against his buddy, got 6-0ed, and committed suicide afterwords. Stay out of my thread, you murderer!

We are NOT all equals either. Sure, maybe as human beings we are, but definitely not in the Pokemon TCG, or any other game for that matter. In the MLB is everyone equal? NBA? How about the NFL? Are Rex Grossman and Peyton Manning equal? No, one is a scrub and one is good, and everyone knows this; even Rex.

And finally, I'm not even going to comment on the one deck thing. Everyone who matters to me knows that I can pick up any solid deck without ever playing it before and still have an edge on anyone I play. I play lots of different decks outside of tournaments, but in tournaments I've played Kingdra all year because I don't lose with it, so if it aint broke why fix it?
 
creativity is good. But in a competative environment creativity for its own sake may not be wise.
 
BigChuck01 said:
Of course I'm going to gauge a players skill on the amount of tournament wins they have. What SHOULD I base a players skill on, how nice they are and how big their Lv. X collection is? Amount of wins in Pokemon is the equivalent to "keeping score" in other games, and usually the person with the higher score is better.
Click to expand...

I love how you immediately add the word "skill" to it, while I say you gauge a PERSON, not that persons SKILL. You call me an IDIOT for not having as many WINS as you. Quite the difference.

I'm not hyping up something. I'm just saying that they HAVE been used/have their uses.

And really now, you're going to compare Pokemon players with major sport stars?


Also, thanks to your threat, some kid tries to build a 4-4 Claydol 4 Uxie deck and played it against his buddy, got 6-0'd and committed suicide.

Now there is something to be said for some of your original arguments, dont get me wrong. Your attitude of calling people scrubs/failures/idiots for wanting to try out different stuff (You know, for FUN) is really sickening though.
 
Scipio said:
Now there is something to be said for some of your original arguments, dont get me wrong. Your attitude of calling people scrubs/failures/idiots for wanting to try out different stuff (You know, for FUN) is really sickening though.
Click to expand...

I don't think he called people trying out different stuff idiots. I think he called people who try out different stuff and claim it's competitively viable when it isn't idiots. By the way, it's a sickening thought that you think the only way people can have fun in this game is to try all sorts of new decks, and to totally dismiss that anyone could actually enjoy playing to win.
 
I wanted to post something about fun stuff for leagues, and even after tourney's but I think I won't, as this is just becoming a flame war, and I don't want to get insulted by anyone, either.

sorry to stray from topic.

Boring is consistent and boring does win, but I still like to try fun stuff where there is a place for it; Leagues and such. Tourneys are a whole different animal, and I think the 2 shouldn't be compared.

we also need to keep in mind that there are 2 kinds of players at least; those like Big Chuck and my husband, who just go in for the kill em all win win win decks, and those that play together for fun, friends, trading, etc. I am the latter, while my hubby, and obviously Bigchuck, is not.

I will say this though. I met alot of champions this weekend at the PR I went to in San Diego, they were already down for Worlds. I would say 90% of them were very nice, helpful people, I met only 1 who had that poor of an attitude.

I'm not defending big chuck, cuz I feel his tude does not promote OP's "spirit of the Game", but he has the right to have it, and he's not alone, there are more like him out there, just deal with it, ignore it, whatever.
 
vanderbilt_grad said:
Just MHO but many folks in the game overvalue creativity.

It's a good thing, but it's not the end all and be all of the game.
Click to expand...

I agree with this.

I am reminded of a post by Jim Ferrell quite a while back (I searched for it but could not find it) where he discussed the tradeoff between creativity and winning. Jim's conclusion - he preferred winning to being creative.

In Jim's case, he could win with pretty much anything, IMO.

But I have never been more bored with this game than when I played Blaziken EX.

I've never built or played a Gardy/Gallade, Gechamp, LBS, Rock-Lock, Gatr, ...

And it's been a long time since I won anything.

And I don't mind.

I'd be more competitive if I DID go with an archetype. For a lot of people, the decision on tournament day is simply the decision of WHICH archetype to play.

If someone is complaining that they're not winning, go with a proven deck. It's just that simple.

But don't think that you're going to create something and come in a go rogue against everyone. At least, not unless your name rhymes with Kimmy Callard.
 
A Worlds invite is on the line, so why not just play something they're comfortable with? If it gets you positive results almost every time, why not stick with it?
 
Nice article. I was thinking the other day it's pretty funny my beedrill deck is made up of 0 holographic cards. I wouldn't be caught dead playing this in 1999! Hahaha
 
prodigal_fanboy said:
Warning, the following is a link to an outside website (wizards.com/Magic/...). If you do not wish to be directed away from Pokegym, or feel that it is against your moral fiber to visit Wizards' on account of some grudge from their years in control of this TCG, do not click the following link:

Timmy, Johnny, and Spike.

A lot of what you touched upon here is a result of a clash of different player personalities as described above. Now, due to the differing natures of the game, I would argue that Johnny and Timmy are more easily combined into one personality for the Pokemon TCG, but then again, there are also decks that are decidedly not "Spike" in nature, but only fall into one of the categories.

Scipio, what you post about 'playing for fun' as a criticism of individuals referring to cards as 'bad' is no more righteous than individuals saying that those cards should only be bindered, or given away to kids at your local card shop. There are cards printed for Spike - Kingdra, Claydol, etc., and there are cards printed for Johnny and Timmy.

All in all, good read, thanks for the voice of reason.
Click to expand...


I think this was the best post in this whole thread. It really boils down to there being different types of people who play for different reasons - some to win, some to play cool cards, some to be creative. I would recommend that everyone, who has not already, read the article about Timmy, Johnny and Spike .
 
Chuck is so bitter! Haha Chuck, I actually didn't remember our first match you wrote about.

Chuck has all legit points, but some of you complain too much. This format wasn't that bad! There's never been a bad format imo. Each of them have there own disadvantages and advantages - but they're all skillful and all enjoyable. One person might like a variety of good decks in a format, another person might dislike it. There's no "right" or "wrong" for formats is basically what I'm trying to get at.
 
A good point to make about Claydol and Uxie not being used by new players because they are "boring" is that many kids don't want to use a Pokemon they don't attack with.

When I've tried to explain Claydol and other bench sitters to newer players, they sometimes look at me with incredulity that one isn't supposed to attack with it.
 
yoyofsho16 said:
A good point to make about Claydol and Uxie not being used by new players because they are "boring" is that many kids don't want to use a Pokemon they don't attack with.

When I've tried to explain Claydol and other bench sitters to newer players, they sometimes look at me with incredulity that one isn't supposed to attack with it.
Click to expand...

QFT

This is basically what it boils down to. Some people think it is boring to have pokemon using a power on the bench and never attacking. Personally, I don't. Most meta decks are interesting to me, but boring to others. On the other hand, it may just be that I barely ever play meta decks, I almost always go rogue. What people have to realize is that some cards are better than others. Luxray is good. 150 damage attacks usually aren't.
 
Ness said:
Chuck is so bitter! Haha Chuck, I actually didn't remember our first match you wrote about.

Chuck has all legit points, but some of you complain too much. This format wasn't that bad! There's never been a bad format imo. Each of them have there own disadvantages and advantages - but they're all skillful and all enjoyable. One person might like a variety of good decks in a format, another person might dislike it. There's no "right" or "wrong" for formats is basically what I'm trying to get at.
Click to expand...
Though you may have a point, I seem to remember a poor format or two where everybody and their brother's dog catching aunt's cousin played Feraligatr, or Slowking. Wasn't the most fun I've seen.
 
Ness didn't play during Neon. He doesn't remember the two G8r vs. Big Fire vs. Slowking formats b/c he wasn't a part of them. He came back and played some random Base Set Zapdos deck after LC was released.
 
ColdCoates90 said:
Sami is obvious a world class player, but he could most likely pickup a starter deck and win uk nationals. lol
Click to expand...

I'm assuming that you think that UK Nationals is easy to win? Have you ever actually played in it?

Yacine Top8'd Worlds in '08. Karl Blake went 4-3 at UK Nationals 09 but went 6-1 in the Swiss at Worlds. UK National Senior winner got 3rd at Worlds. UK Nationals is not easy to win.
 
nnaann said:
I'm assuming that you think that UK Nationals is easy to win? Have you ever actually played in it?

Yacine Top8'd Worlds in '08. Karl Blake went 4-3 at UK Nationals 09 but went 6-1 in the Swiss at Worlds. UK National Senior winner got 3rd at Worlds. UK Nationals is not easy to win.
Click to expand...

Yeah, i think the american guy is just saying that there is so much more good players in US and its much harder to win or even Top Cut.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top