Change From Tradition to Better the Game

[Slev]

I don't really see why a system that rewards players for getting their Pokemon KO'd to artificially boost their chances of making a comeback is desirable.

I'm not sure what you are referencing, but I don't think anyone should be rewarded for getting their pokemon Ko'd if you are directing this at some one else's posts perhaps quote for reference?

---------- Post added 01/25/2013 at 04:27 PM ----------

Players do start on equal footing at the beginning of every game. Both players have the opportunity to get "bad prizes." Some decks are designed to avoid prize problems (playing 3-4 copies of all important cards), while other decks are willing to risk prize problems to run more complex strategies (playing 1-1 lines of situational Pokemon). Most games of strategy have a particular amount of variance, including all trading card games, poker, blackjack, etc. The amount of marginal variance added by the prize mechanic is negligible and mostly inconsequential. You're exaggerating the effect that bad prizes have on a player's performance over the course of a season.

Players are on equal footing in the sense that every player prizes 10% of the cards in their deck at the beginning of the game.

You are right there is variance in every game, and again you are right that both players equally prize a 10th of their cards. I just don't agree with the additional variance brought upon by prizes. Even though the variance is marginally small it should be removed. Maybe I am over doing it but I don't see the positive aspects of the current prize system. It just seems like a potential handicap to either player without much if any positive aspect brought to the game.


Have you ever tried playing without prizing 6 cards in your deck? Are you willing to try it, and come back with your thoughts on the experience? Even if you hate it I would like to hear what people think of playing without prize cards after they have tried it.

 

[Moothead2]

You realize this has been touched upon already, yes?

To be honest, I didn't read every post and quite frankly I don't care. It's a valid point, no?

I don't really see why a system that rewards players for getting their Pokemon KO'd to artificially boost their chances of making a comeback is desirable.

Not to mention the card they draw is more often than not going to be a card that won't help them all that much.

Are you a Villa fan by any chance :smile:?

 

[Otaku]

I don't really see why a system that rewards players for getting their Pokemon KO'd to artificially boost their chances of making a comeback is desirable.

I am guessing that is directed at masteryanx, Glumanda, GodBlessAmerica, or me; we referenced games that use a mechanic similar to Prizes, but you get a card when your opponent does the equivalent of "taking a Prize".

I honestly would like to know baby_mario... have you played any such games? How much thought have you given to it?

I consider it preferable to the current system, but by no means do I consider it "the" solution. Remember, as is the game currently "artificially boosts" players chances of winning by giving them a reward for something that needs no reward: progressing towards a "win". A neutral system would be no Prizes at all and simple score being kept.

The idea behind the system games like Kaijudo use, besides having cards to reference and keep track of score, to add an additional element of luck; random cards from your deck removed at the beginning of the game), an additional element of skill, and an element to diminishing luck.

It adds "luck" as compared to a game that just uses a pencil and paper to keep score in the same way Prizes add more luck to Pokémon as is; random cards from your deck are removed and set-aside. On the other hand, the luck factor is reduced in two ways; unlike with with the actual Prize rules, "reverse Prizes" would mean that a loss by Prizes kept only one card from seeing your hand (barring obvious examples of taking more than one Prize in a turn).

The second way luck is reduced is the case of the "lucky lead"; instead of your opponent lucking into a quick KO and getting more resources, instead you get a consolation Prize. Yes, this happens with skill based KOs as well, but if you have a killer set-up, without skill (in deck design and use of whatever you just got), you aren't reversing the status quo. It also adds skill in how you take Prizes. Taking multiple Prizes at once becomes much more important when your opponent is getting extra resources from it.

 

[baby mario]

To paraphrase the meme, I tried Vanguard once . . . it was awful.

The 'take a Prize when you lose a Pokemon' system does not seem to me to produce any real advantages over the current one in terms of starting players off on a level playing field (the original aim of the OP's post). Making it slightly easier to make comebacks does not make the game any more fair in my opinion. Certainly not on the person whose deck is actually performing well and doing what it is supposed to do.

 

[Prime]

If everything was basic, even evolutions, like with SPs, then this problem would be reduced to almost nothing.

 

[eriknance]

If everything was basic, even evolutions, like with SPs, then this problem would be reduced to almost nothing.

I'm guessing you're saying this because evolution lines wouldn't get tied up in the prizes. That still ignores having important trainers/energy getting prized. During the SP days, we had Azelf around because Lv.Xs were the "one-ofs" (or "two-ofs") of the format. We currently have Town Map, which is... okay at best (mainly because it doesn't grab you anything like Azelf did, just lets you know where things are).

Going by your previous posts, I know you think evolution lines are largely filler that don't make sense for the game. I actually share that view, but I'd rather see more usable Basics and Stage 1s than an SP-like format again.

 

[Darkrai EX]

I'll test the mechanic firsthand to see what it feels like, but a counterpoint could be that a losing player needs to Catcher-KO something weak on the bench to rip a necessary prize. Otherwise, it becomes a game of sacrificing in order to draw into a needed prize. That seems like a harder scenario to begin a recovery from. At least by taking the cheap KO for a prize, they are advancing their game state toward a win, not the other way around.

Contrary to lolsjackal, I'd like to try the inverted prize system because of that very effect. Catcher has made many cards unplayable and Evolutions with weak Basics extremely underpowered due to their vulnerability, but if your opponent would be knowingly rewarding you by taking a cheap shot (meanwhile moving him or herself closer to the win, let's not forget this), maybe he'd reconsider and invest his counters on a worthier target that will give him a more strategic advantage. The game shouldn't be a mad dash for prizes, in my opinion, and a change like this would add another layer of strategy, balancing the game ever so slightly without tossing out a key aspect of what makes this TCG unique.

The 'take a Prize when you lose a Pokemon' system does not seem to me to produce any real advantages over the current one in terms of starting players off on a level playing field (the original aim of the OP's post). Making it slightly easier to make comebacks does not make the game any more fair in my opinion. Certainly not on the person whose deck is actually performing well and doing what it is supposed to do.

To your last point I strongly disagree. If the losing player has started off on the wrong foot, it's usually because of a bad starting hand, dead draws, or key cards being prized. A change like this could theoretically work to balance all of those. But if the loosing deck is poorly designed, an extra card per Pokemon lost won't help much- superior builds win out, and nothing unfairly cripples a superior build like the early game inconsistency that our current system can create.

 

[Pidgeotto Trainer]

I agree with many of the points here, prizes (in the sense they take cards out of your deck) are really a flawed mechanic in my opinion.

Whether this game mechanic ever gets changed though, I would love to see the following rule: 'At the beginning of the game, after placing prizes, you may look at your 6 prizes, and then shuffle them.' All good players already check this, but it would save a lot of time from every game. (~minute per side) Save even more time doing this during setup.



While I think taking away prizes would change the strategy of the game in a non-negligible way (though that isn't bad), the 'hurry up and check what's prized easily' rule would not change the game significantly, except to reduce time concerns.

 

[Benzo]

One thing I would like to point out about the comparison to the TCG towards the VG:

When you go to battle your opponant, your team of 6 (maximun unless the battle rules state otherwise or a specific format restricts the party count) is already available to the player.

The card game does not make it so that you have full access to have 6 Pokemon out and battle ready right away.
(I know that this sentence will get nit-picked and and the "numbers are going to start getting tossed out about the odds and all that"- this does not apply since the VG is 100% at the start of the battle to allowed maximum number in your party allowed).

If the TCG is wanting to further mimic the VG's- here is an idea as to how the TCG can get closer to the VG side of things as far as comparison goes:

People will still need to have only 60 cards for a deck. 6 prize cards can still be the same.

Now, for "set up"-

Each Player can have 6 basic Pokemon cards set out onto the play area, 1 as active and 5 benched.
(Your 6 party Pokemon). These cards are still counted towards your 60 card count.
Both players have the option to make full use of having 6 basic Pokemon out or not.

Before set up, both players will search through their decks, pull out up to 6 basic Pokemon and place them in the play area right in front of each other (bench and active).

Then, both players will shuffle their decks. Cut each others decks. Draw 7 cards each for their hands, and then immediatly place out 6 prize cards.
Play the game as normal current rules are from here on out.

Just some thoughts is all.

 

[TRAINER HEZ]

Whether this game mechanic ever gets changed though, I would love to see the following rule: 'At the beginning of the game, after placing prizes, you may look at your 6 prizes, and then shuffle them.' All good players already check this, but it would save a lot of time from every game. (~minute per side) Save even more time doing this during setup.

The 150 system is essentially this in effect, draw your 6 prizes and 7 cards all at once, select the 6 you want to be prizes, shuffle and set aside face-down, the rest is your starting hand. Early game consistency AND you have control over what's prized.

Another idea I had (though not quite as smooth) would be that the current system is kept for casual/league games but at tournaments you'd use a sideboard system. Some card games (like MtG) have a sideboard of 15 extra cards you can "side in" in certain match-ups. In Pokemon you could implement a sideboard by selecting 6 cards from your 15 before the round starts and put them as prize cards?
Your 60 is untouched and you have access to extra techs.

 

[baby mario]

To your last point I strongly disagree. If the losing player has started off on the wrong foot, it's usually because of a bad starting hand, dead draws, or key cards being prized. A change like this could theoretically work to balance all of those. But if the loosing deck is poorly designed, an extra card per Pokemon lost won't help much- superior builds win out, and nothing unfairly cripples a superior build like the early game inconsistency that our current system can create.

And I disagree with you.

Losing starts are not always down to sheer bad luck (maybe the opponent's play or deck choice had something to do with it?), and if a deck is crippled by early game inconsistency, I would not be calling it a 'superior build'. Decks need to be constructed in a way that takes account of the Prize system. Those that aren't are not good builds at all.