Is the current format the worst ever?

[vaporeon]

So Paragraph 1 and 2 are you pulling things out of thin air about Pokemon. Last paragraph is you pulling stuff out of thin air about Smash Bros.

If Pokemon is "easy", I'd like to hear what your tournament record is this season. And don't tell me it's random when you have players like Pooka going undefeated for 27 games in a row or whatever ridiculous amount with a deck like Ho-oh which few thought viable before the set was released.

"This making games easier for newer players is bad for tournaments." <- This statement is offensively wrong.

Well, explain to me how I'm wrong. Explain to me how Pokemon has nothing to do with evolution. Explain to me how its not in its core design of the game. As for the smash players, I have talked to may smash players who play Melee and they would say brawl fails compared to melee. I play with these people and go to tournaments. They say brawl is easy mode. Some even went as far to hack brawl to create Project M. They are doing that to turn brawl into melee.

As for my tournament record, it is random. I'll ether top cut, go x-1 and miss cut, break even or just do bad. I also play deck with my favorite Pokemon and will never play net decks. Most will never do that of course if the combo is really obvious (blastoise/keldeo). Pooka is a very powerful player but like others in my age group, I can beat him and he can beat me. I also don't play in many tournaments because of a lack of funds or ways to travel. You say this as if I'm not a good player. Don't let my inability to go to every tournament speak for my skill level as a player. On a side note, many players though Ho-Oh ex was a bad card and now they are playing it. You know what, people also though Electrode Prime was a bad card until I started playing it and doing well with it. My time to brag.

For the last point. Tournaments are around so people can put their skill level against their opponents. People play in tournaments to see if they are the best. New players can win tournaments if they have the skill to do so, know their deck card for card and can think of a play in almost every step of the game and to see if your training paid off. Making the game easier for newer players to get into so they can do well in tournaments just makes tournaments feel pointless.

------------------

Kayle, the game is not balanced. In many sets, only the ex Pokemon and a handful of cards are playable, not including trainers. like 90 percent of sets are unplayable, in any format. The game is also designed for evolving Pokemon so they can become stronger. When basic Pokemon take the place of fully evolved pokemon, you have a problem with design at the games core. Balance means all things can work together, which does happen in pokemon because of the power creep in basics and trainer cards. With the release of EX Pokemon, there is no need to print basic pokemon with 130 HP, yet stage 2 Pokemon get 140 at a minimum. The game has design problems that unbalances it.

 

[ShadowGuard]

You know what, people also though Electrode Prime was a bad card until I started playing it and doing well with it. My time to brag.

Electrode Prime was a bad card when it was released. People started playing it because Kyurem/Cobalion/Electrode did well in Japan before you had an opportunity to do well with it.

However I partly agree with you on the other points. The current format has a high luck factor (at least compared to pre-BW formats). This is neither helping competitive players nor newcomers. Losing cause of donks, bad hands or big basic overruns makes new players quit early. I've seen a lot of examples in my years as player and league leader. We had a player in our league who decided to rather play Magic, not because she was any better there or had more chances, but just because she didn't lose in such a devastating way as in Pokémon.

Still, once again, a ban list will not change that (besides the fact that it won't happen cause P!P wants the players to get EXes and other good cards), only pre-BW rules and future card prints can.

Oh, btw, evolution cards got better, too. Something like Dusknoir BCR would be considered broken two years ago. I think allowing to rare candy immediately (just not turn 1) would do wonders.

 

[TheRolesWePlay]

However I partly agree with you on the other points. The current format has a high luck factor (at least compared to pre-BW formats). This is neither helping competitive players nor newcomers. Losing cause of donks, bad hands or big basic overruns makes new players quit early. I've seen a lot of examples in my years as player and league leader. We had a player in our league who decided to rather play Magic, not because she was any better there or had more chances, but just because she didn't lose in such a devastating way as in Pokémon.

How is this a more luck based of a format? Sure there's a rather big focus on set-up, but not as much as many past formats. *coughSableyecough* With cards like Skyla, Comp Search, and Ultra ball, which readily get mostly anything you need and many options don't require a coin flip, I don't see the major luck factor, at least not to the degree as SP and Gardey where whoever set-up first effectively won.

 

[baby mario]

Well, explain to me how I'm wrong. Explain to me how Pokemon has nothing to do with evolution. Explain to me how its not in its core design of the game.

Evolution has indeed been a key feature of Pokemon since day 1 in both the TCG and the anime. Agreed.

But they haven't taken it away from the TCG. They are still printing Stage 1 and Stage 2 Pokemon for everyone to use. It's just that most of them aren't very competitive at tournament level right at the moment. (Tournament level is not the whole of the TCG by any means).

Now you could argue that Pokemon is a more enjoyable game when all the different Stages are competitive (I don't necessarily agree with that, but accept it is what some want), but they are hardly violating the concept of Pokemon when they don't make it this way. There's never been any kind of rule or even much of a precedent for this being the case. Very few evolutions were competitive in the early days; almost no decks were built around Basics during the GG era. It has always varied over time.

I mean, you could also make a case that the TCG is actually reflecting what happens in the anime/manga/games. Here, Legendary Basic Pokemon are by far the most powerful and are easily capable of defeating strong Stage 2 evolutions one-on-one. Who is winning in a straight fight: Charizard or Mewtwo? Pidgeot or Rayquaza?

 

[FirestormXVI]

Well, explain to me how I'm wrong. Explain to me how Pokemon has nothing to do with evolution. Explain to me how its not in its core design of the game.

I never said Pokemon has nothing to do with evolution. I come to the TCG after several years of playing the video game competitively. I'll preface this by saying this is my first season playing the TCG competitively. Last time I played the TCG even casually before 2011-2012 was when Hitmonchan was one of the best cards in the game.

Ironically, what got me interested in the TCG was how cool Pokemon that are absolutely terrible in the video game like Beedrill, Vileplume, and Luxray were great. So of course, I'm a little disappointed that the same Pokemon that are awesome in the video game like Terrakion, Hydreigon, and Landorus seem to rule the TCG now as I start playing. However, you'll see a common theme there - the same Pokemon seem to be great in both. As others have mentioned, that's something the TCG seems to be doing now. It's a card game based on a video game and the Pokemon's power seem to reflect their power in the games. That's not what I prefer, but it's not worse or better to do so. It also seems to support that although evolution is a key theme in Pokemon, it's not the end-all-and-be-all of the franchise. Heck, Ash seems to be pretty adamantly against evolving that Pikachu of his in the anime too...

As for the smash players, I have talked to may smash players who play Melee and they would say brawl fails compared to melee. I play with these people and go to tournaments. They say brawl is easy mode. Some even went as far to hack brawl to create Project M. They are doing that to turn brawl into melee.

For every Melee player who dislikes Brawl I can find a player that loves Brawl. I prefer Melee myself as I enjoy the pace of play to Brawl. If anyone calls Brawl "bad" because "it's easy for a new player to win" then they are poor players themselves. I can go up against a good Brawl player and win 0% of the time.

As for my tournament record, it is random. I'll ether top cut, go x-1 and miss cut, break even or just do bad. I also play deck with my favorite Pokemon and will never play net decks. Most will never do that of course if the combo is really obvious (blastoise/keldeo). Pooka is a very powerful player but like others in my age group, I can beat him and he can beat me. I also don't play in many tournaments because of a lack of funds or ways to travel. You say this as if I'm not a good player. Don't let my inability to go to every tournament speak for my skill level as a player. On a side note, many players though Ho-Oh ex was a bad card and now they are playing it. You know what, people also though Electrode Prime was a bad card until I started playing it and doing well with it. My time to brag.

Ok. So basically what you're saying is you put artificial limits on yourself then whine about not being able to stand toe-to-toe with actual competitive players.

For the last point. Tournaments are around so people can put their skill level against their opponents. People play in tournaments to see if they are the best. New players can win tournaments if they have the skill to do so, know their deck card for card and can think of a play in almost every step of the game and to see if your training paid off. Making the game easier for newer players to get into so they can do well in tournaments just makes tournaments feel pointless.

Tournaments are competitive environments where the best to rise to the top. A low skill floor is good because it makes the game more inviting for newer players and grows the community. What makes a game truly great competitively is a high skill ceiling as well. A new player shouldn't be able to win a tournament, but they should be able to understand what's going on and feel like they're in the game. I think Pokemon currently has an appropriate floor. Whether or not the ceiling is high enough is something I don't feel qualified to say and something I know for a fact that you aren't qualified to give your opinion on based on your posts here.

 

[ShadowGuard]

How is this a more luck based of a format? Sure there's a rather big focus on set-up, but not as much as many past formats. *coughSableyecough* With cards like Skyla, Comp Search, and Ultra ball, which readily get mostly anything you need and many options don't require a coin flip, I don't see the major luck factor, at least not to the degree as SP and Gardey where whoever set-up first effectively won.

a) donks - yes, there formats with more donks, but also such with less to no donks
b) reliable draw and search support - got better with Skyla and Computer Search, still not at the level of Claydol, Holon Engine and others
c) speed - if you can't do anything for one or two turn, you'll be overrun

Sableye wasn't a format. We never played this in Europe. US Battle Road tested it but there weren't any major tournaments.
SP wasn't really about setting up first and there was a lot of skill involved.
Gardevoir format had Scramble Energy which basically is the definition of a comeback option.

 

[vaporeon]

I never said Pokemon has nothing to do with evolution. I come to the TCG after several years of playing the video game competitively. I'll preface this by saying this is my first season playing the TCG competitively. Last time I played the TCG even casually before 2011-2012 was when Hitmonchan was one of the best cards in the game.

You said both my first points were wrong or rather "pulling out of thin air"when I said evolution is a core factor of the game. Evolution in the card game means getting stronger throughout the game. Its been like that since day one. If it were not for the energy removals and some poor card design, each evolution could have been useful. Now there's almost no benefit to using evolution pass the ones that cant do energy shenanigans and thats a problem and shows some of the core components are damaged. In the video game, each stage of evolution is useful. They all bring their own strengths and weaknesses to the table.

Ironically, what got me interested in the TCG was how cool Pokemon that are absolutely terrible in the video game like Beedrill, Vileplume, and Luxray were great. So of course, I'm a little disappointed that the same Pokemon that are awesome in the video game like Terrakion, Hydreigon, and Landorus seem to rule the TCG now as I start playing. However, you'll see a common theme there - the same Pokemon seem to be great in both. As others have mentioned, that's something the TCG seems to be doing now. It's a card game based on a video game and the Pokemon's power seem to reflect their power in the games. That's not what I prefer, but it's not worse or better to do so. It also seems to support that although evolution is a key theme in Pokemon, it's not the end-all-and-be-all of the franchise. Heck, Ash seems to be pretty adamantly against evolving that Pikachu of his in the anime too...

The card game should NEVER be modeled after the video game. I dont like how they are doing that. All it does is pick favorites and that should be avoided in a game like Pokemon that has over 600 characters. Even in the video game, I can take Pokemon and make the useable because you can train them in anyway you like. Even Ash's Pikachu gets special treatment in the TCG or any pikachu for that matter. Pikachu is the only evolving Basic that could be played in a stand alone deck and do well. In the TCG, pikachu gets light ball which makes them fight on levels as stronger Pokemon. With is 306 max speed stat, it outspeeds a lot of Pokemon. I'd rather not use Pokemon the get special treatment of a discussion like this.

For every Melee player who dislikes Brawl I can find a player that loves Brawl. I prefer Melee myself as I enjoy the pace of play to Brawl. If anyone calls Brawl "bad" because "it's easy for a new player to win" then they are poor players themselves. I can go up against a good Brawl player and win 0% of the time.

Thats true but most of the melee community dislikes brawl because of how watered down it was compared to melee. I love brawl myself because I was never any good at melee's advanced play skills but I would like to play at that level. It was a chance for me to play on others level with little learning curves to get over. Some melee players do say brawl is bad but you see them winning tournaments. players are entitled to have their opinions about how they feel about their game.

Ok. So basically what you're saying is you put artificial limits on yourself then whine about not being able to stand toe-to-toe with actual competitive players.

What artificial limits am I putting on myself? I dont think I ever said something that would warrant a comment like that. We're simply talking about balance about the game. I can also play toe to toe with the games best players. Player status does not matter to me and the opinions of those players you praise so much should not be the only ones that matter.

Tournaments are competitive environments where the best to rise to the top. A low skill floor is good because it makes the game more inviting for newer players and grows the community. What makes a game truly great competitively is a high skill ceiling as well. A new player shouldn't be able to win a tournament, but they should be able to understand what's going on and feel like they're in the game. I think Pokemon currently has an appropriate floor. Whether or not the ceiling is high enough is something I don't feel qualified to say and something I know for a fact that you aren't qualified to give your opinion on based on your posts here.

To start this off, EVERYONE is able to give their opinions on a public forum. You dont need any qualifications what so ever to give a opinions.

Pokemon TCG has skill in it. it does not have as much skill in it that some players would like. Like I said before. I went back to yugioh because I feel I can get better skill intensive games from that then I get from Pokemon. Pokemon 'designed ' tournaments meant for the lower level players so they can get a taste of what it means to play in the big leagues and those tournaments were Battle Roads and up to the BW block, they were doing their jobs.

Battle Roads, I considered a training ground for new players so they can learn tournament structure and gain a mindset of how to play against many opponents without making any deck changes and to learn how to play under pressure. As of now BRs have been as competitive as any other tournament and I don't like that. The point I'm trying to make is when you lower the bar, it takes away from those elitist or super competitive players. Its why melee players were able to separate themselves from brawl players. Some pokemon players I talk to started playing magic and yugioh because of how 'easy' the game is and thats using their own words.

 

[FirestormXVI]

You said both my first points were wrong or rather "pulling out of thin air"when I said evolution is a core factor of the game. Evolution in the card game means getting stronger throughout the game. Its been like that since day one. If it were not for the energy removals and some poor card design, each evolution could have been useful. Now there's almost no benefit to using evolution pass the ones that cant do energy shenanigans and thats a problem and shows some of the core components are damaged. In the video game, each stage of evolution is useful. They all bring their own strengths and weaknesses to the table.

No. In the game only the final stage of evolution is useful in 99% of situations with the few exceptions being Pokemon who are better defensively with Eviolite rather than Leftovers or Sitrus Berry.

The card game should NEVER be modeled after the video game. I dont like how they are doing that. All it does is pick favorites and that should be avoided in a game like Pokemon that has over 600 characters. Even in the video game, I can take Pokemon and make the useable because you can train them in anyway you like. Even Ash's Pikachu gets special treatment in the TCG or any pikachu for that matter. Pikachu is the only evolving Basic that could be played in a stand alone deck and do well. In the TCG, pikachu gets light ball which makes them fight on levels as stronger Pokemon. With is 306 max speed stat, it outspeeds a lot of Pokemon. I'd rather not use Pokemon the get special treatment of a discussion like this.

I honestly can't understand what you're trying to say in this paragraph.

Thats true but most of the melee community dislikes brawl because of how watered down it was compared to melee. I love brawl myself because I was never any good at melee's advanced play skills but I would like to play at that level. It was a chance for me to play on others level with little learning curves to get over. Some melee players do say brawl is bad but you see them winning tournaments. players are entitled to have their opinions about how they feel about their game.

I don't mean locals. I mean majors / nationals / world level tournaments. Yes, Brawl takes less technical skill to play than Melee. As any fighting game player will tell you though, technical skill is only half the equation.

What artificial limits am I putting on myself? I dont think I ever said something that would warrant a comment like that. We're simply talking about balance about the game. I can also play toe to toe with the games best players. Player status does not matter to me and the opinions of those players you praise so much should not be the only ones that matter.

Playing only with your favourites and refusing to use popular archetypes because you consider it "netdecking" is an artificial limitation you've imposed on yourself. I definitely think more opinions than only that of the top players should be considered. I just don't think your opinion is well-founded.

To start this off, EVERYONE is able to give their opinions on a public forum. You dont need any qualifications what so ever to give a opinions.

Anyone is able to give their opinions but without credibility or evidence, it's hard to take those opinions seriously.

Pokemon TCG has skill in it. it does not have as much skill in it that some players would like. Like I said before. I went back to yugioh because I feel I can get better skill intensive games from that then I get from Pokemon. Pokemon 'designed ' tournaments meant for the lower level players so they can get a taste of what it means to play in the big leagues and those tournaments were Battle Roads and up to the BW block, they were doing their jobs.

Battle Roads, I considered a training ground for new players so they can learn tournament structure and gain a mindset of how to play against many opponents without making any deck changes and to learn how to play under pressure. As of now BRs have been as competitive as any other tournament and I don't like that. The point I'm trying to make is when you lower the bar, it takes away from those elitist or super competitive players. Its why melee players were able to separate themselves from brawl players. Some pokemon players I talk to started playing magic and yugioh because of how 'easy' the game is and thats using their own words.

For some reason you've jumped to the conclusion that because Battle Roads draw large competitive crowds these days that this means the other events are easy. The opposite is true. I'm going to go by the multiple people I've talked to and trust the opinions of more saying Pokemon is a much better balanced and designed game than Yu-Gi-Oh, sorry. Magic is a very different game that is worth switching to if that's what you seek. Pokemon will never be Magic.

 

[Gamester2488]

That is exactly my problem with your/vaporeon's argument right now.

How you WANT the game balanced is irrelevant. Whether you WANT it balanced one way or another or not does not matter.

It is balanced.



If people want their apples to be red, and they see a granny smith apple, they are "entitled" to say that that is not an apple. That does not make them right, and when they attempt to argue with you about the idea that apples should be red and therefore this can't be an apple, all they accomplish is looking ignorant and stubborn.

(edit) Now it's another thing entirely to say you don't LIKE this format - or a certain kind of apple. I actually like Fuji apples the best myself, but the fact is, an apple's an apple. And this format is fine, even though there are things about it I might like better if they were different.

I guess balance is the wrong word. Certain cards are too strong, but they are balanced around each other. Basics are balanced around each other right now, and that's very obvious. However, that takes an entire aspect of the game and shoves it to the side. When you take one of the fundamental aspects of the game and neglect it, then I see that as a problem.

The format is warped around Basics. I don't think that's necessarily healthy. Is the format fine as far as playability? Yeah, it is, you have a ton of choices, but those choices are limited to one set of cards.

So, what I'm trying to say I guess is, if Big Basics and Stage 2's were allowed to co-exist in the meta game, and not just have Stage 2's used as engines that is, then I think the format would be much better. It would take a well designed series of sets to have that happen, but I think the biggest issue is how Basic EX's have more HP and do equal or more damage than Stage 2's, which gives you no incentive to play Stage 2's. Why invest in something that is weaker than something you can get for free?

Oh, and Fuji and Golden Delicious are the best.

For some reason you've jumped to the conclusion that because Battle Roads draw large competitive crowds these days that this means the other events are easy. The opposite is true. I'm going to go by the multiple people I've talked to and trust the opinions of more saying Pokemon is a much better balanced and designed game than Yu-Gi-Oh, sorry. Magic is a very different game that is worth switching to if that's what you seek. Pokemon will never be Magic.

Yu-Gi-Oh is a terribly designed game. Not the game designers fault, but the basic structure of the game will never allow it to be "balanced" well. This is because when everything is free, you generally don't have much resource management. As for Magic v. Pokemon, I actually think right now Pokemon is better than Magic. In magic you have a ton of cards that are Mewtwo EX power level. The problem is every single deck has access to these cards, and each one trumps the previous one played, so it comes down to every game being a contest to see who can resolve the last biggest, splashiest mythic rare. Pokemon at least you can get advantages in that aspect by picking the right deck for the tournament. Each big splashy EX has a weakness that can be exploited with proper deck building.

 

[TheRolesWePlay]

a) donks - yes, there formats with more donks, but also such with less to no donks
b) reliable draw and search support - got better with Skyla and Computer Search, still not at the level of Claydol, Holon Engine and others
c) speed - if you can't do anything for one or two turn, you'll be overrun

a) poor set-ups that cost you a donk have always existed, not as fully sure, but that's what you get when you run a 40 HP basic.
b) personally I feel that our Trainer pool is plenty divers as it is (and with maginal luck cards) and we don't need something like Claydol running around in my personal opinion
c) That's always been a problem in some way, it just so happens that now is faster paced.

Sableye wasn't a format. We never played this in Europe. US Battle Road tested it but there weren't any major tournaments.
SP wasn't really about setting up first and there was a lot of skill involved.
Gardevoir format had Scramble Energy which basically is the definition of a comeback option.

I wasn't talking about Sableye as a format, but as a card in general. Most decks in that format played Sableye and if you didn't start with one there was a fair chance the opponent would have a distinct advantage.
May have mispoken on SPs, I never played the decks themselves...didn't play them well anyway.
Gardevoir didn't see a lot of Scramble, sure it was there, but Scramble wasn't a big card in general. Few decks (GG included) used it, plus I don't see how that compromises the luck value, you still need to get set-up with out powers, and draw into it.

I apologize if any of these just kind of went nowhere. I'm a little tired at the time of writing this.

 

[StormFront]

Here is the way I would like in terms of Basics/Stage 1/2's

1. Non evolving basics should be used for tech purposes like setting up and helping difficult matchups
2. Stage 1's should generally be the most energy efficient attackers in the game
3. Stage 2's should have the strongest abilities and the most HP

 

[ShadowGuard]

I wasn't talking about Sableye as a format, but as a card in general. Most decks in that format played Sableye and if you didn't start with one there was a fair chance the opponent would have a distinct advantage.

Ehm... yea, that's what I mean, the MD-BLW format, which is not a real format. I can't remember any other formats where "most decks" played Sableye and you got a big advantage by starting with it.

Gardevoir didn't see a lot of Scramble, sure it was there, but Scramble wasn't a big card in general. Few decks (GG included) used it, plus I don't see how that compromises the luck value, you still need to get set-up with out powers, and draw into it.

Scramble wasn't a big card? There were three big decks in that season, being Plox, Empoleon and Magmortar (pre-MD), all of them made heavy use of Scramble Energy, the last two wouldn't even be good without. The only decks without Scramble Energy were Rogues using Crystal Beach to stop DRE and Scramble in other decks.

And about that "draw into it" - Steven's Advice, Copycat.

 

[TheRolesWePlay]

Ehm... yea, that's what I mean, the MD-BLW format, which is not a real format. I can't remember any other formats where "most decks" played Sableye and you got a big advantage by starting with it.

As I said that wasn't what I meant, I was talking about it in general not just MD-BW.

Scramble wasn't a big card? There were three big decks in that season, being Plox, Empoleon and Magmortar (pre-MD), all of them made heavy use of Scramble Energy, the last two wouldn't even be good without. The only decks without Scramble Energy were Rogues using Crystal Beach to stop DRE and Scramble in other decks.

And about that "draw into it" - Steven's Advice, Copycat.

Might've been my area or something, as Scramble wasn't that popular where I was, and Empoleon wasn't really that popular either, Skittles was though. Additionally I might've worded the last part poorly. I meant you had to draw into it, as you didn't have powers, since Power Lock was pretty much a given.

 

[Otaku]

Yu-Gi-Oh is a terribly designed game. Not the game designers fault, but the basic structure of the game will never allow it to be "balanced" well. This is because when everything is free, you generally don't have much resource management.

I keep checking this thread out of morbid curiosity, and seeing statements I have to disagree with, such as this.

Am I claiming Yu-Gi-Oh has anything resembling what I would call "balance"?

Most assuredly not! When I played Yu-Gi-Oh, I tried to apply the same scrutiny I did to Pokémon. The costing structure is different from Magic... just like it is in Pokémon. The difference is Yu-Gi-Oh seemed to stop caring about it after a while, and focus on big, flashy, powerful cards it will neuter eventually via outclassing it, banning it, or banning what supports it.

It is like the designers didn't stop and think "Our main resources in the game are hand size, only one manual normal Summon per turn, no more than five Monsters in play, only five Spell/Trap Zones, and a shared Field Spell Zone." They didn't realize that Monsters are the hardest cards to play so long as they are Normal summoned (only one per turn), but that as long as they remain that way they need to become the most powerful cards in the game.

They didn't realize (or care) that Traps, as within the basic rules and without specific card effects you can't activate more than five in one turn, and that they thus should have been second only to Monsters. They didn't restrict Spells (especially Normal and Quick-Play) to simple effects that required skilled use (and often combos) to generate advantage. Then they began tossing in new mechanics as well as creating Monster with built-in effects to special summon themselves and at the same time, an effect that would instantly activate, making such cards act as a "Monster/Spell" hybrid... sometimes "Monster/Trap" and sometimes all three! :nonono:

What does this mean to Pokémon? Imagine if during the days of the Base Set, instead of slowly progressing the game to how it played during the first few Modified formats, and then how it played for the three to five years after that... imagine if after the Gym sets Creatures, Inc. decided it was just better to crank out strong Pokémon, Trainers, and Special Energy.

"Normal" Trainers (Items before that was a term) returned to the level of Professor Oak and Super Energy Removal, with only the truly most powerful Banned or Restricted (with the guarantee that they would eventually return!) Supporters never come to be, or else are super-charged to make them even better than the "Items" we got in the Base Set! New Pokémon were mostly useless, save for the handful each set that matched or surpassed Base Set Blastoise, the various "Haymaker" Pokémon, etc. in power.

Then all the various new mechanics that have proven transitional (SP, Pokémon-ex, Level Up, etc.) were added in on top of it.

tl;dr: Pokémon and Yu-Gi-Oh (as TCGs) are quite similar despite key differences in how you play, but how they were managed is far, far different.

 

[FSULugia]

I keep checking this thread out of morbid curiosity, and seeing statements I have to disagree with, such as this.

Am I claiming Yu-Gi-Oh has anything resembling what I would call "balance"?

Most assuredly not! When I played Yu-Gi-Oh, I tried to apply the same scrutiny I did to Pokémon. The costing structure is different from Magic... just like it is in Pokémon. The difference is Yu-Gi-Oh seemed to stop caring about it after a while, and focus on big, flashy, powerful cards it will neuter eventually via outclassing it, banning it, or banning what supports it.

It is like the designers didn't stop and think "Our main resources in the game are hand size, only one manual normal Summon per turn, no more than five Monsters in play, only five Spell/Trap Zones, and a shared Field Spell Zone." They didn't realize that Monsters are the hardest cards to play so long as they are Normal summoned (only one per turn), but that as long as they remain that way they need to become the most powerful cards in the game.

They didn't realize (or care) that Traps, as within the basic rules and without specific card effects you can't activate more than five in one turn, and that they thus should have been second only to Monsters. They didn't restrict Spells (especially Normal and Quick-Play) to simple effects that required skilled use (and often combos) to generate advantage. Then they began tossing in new mechanics as well as creating Monster with built-in effects to special summon themselves and at the same time, an effect that would instantly activate, making such cards act as a "Monster/Spell" hybrid... sometimes "Monster/Trap" and sometimes all three! :nonono:

What does this mean to Pokémon? Imagine if during the days of the Base Set, instead of slowly progressing the game to how it played during the first few Modified formats, and then how it played for the three to five years after that... imagine if after the Gym sets Creatures, Inc. decided it was just better to crank out strong Pokémon, Trainers, and Special Energy.

"Normal" Trainers (Items before that was a term) returned to the level of Professor Oak and Super Energy Removal, with only the truly most powerful Banned or Restricted (with the guarantee that they would eventually return!) Supporters never come to be, or else are super-charged to make them even better than the "Items" we got in the Base Set! New Pokémon were mostly useless, save for the handful each set that matched or surpassed Base Set Blastoise, the various "Haymaker" Pokémon, etc. in power.

Then all the various new mechanics that have proven transitional (SP, Pokémon-ex, Level Up, etc.) were added in on top of it.

tl;dr: Pokémon and Yu-Gi-Oh (as TCGs) are quite similar despite key differences in how you play, but how they were managed is far, far different.

YGO has an ok design as a game itself, but the problem lies in the fact that the game rarely changes its rules. In so many other games do the rules change because of how the rules originally designed were not thought out too well or just werent good in reality or things about a game gradually change over time. A lot of YGO's rules are just awful now a days, Unlimited special summons, unlimited activating of spells and traps/setting them, these rules are broken with the current card pool. You cant expect a fair game when one player can win the entire game within the first 2-3 turns, thats not even a real game.

Pokemon got it right with supporters instead of continuing on with just trainers. The game is a lot slower and lasts a lot longer because of this, its a lot easier to handle somebody having a limited amount of plays per turn. YGO doesnt have any limits and thats a big problem on why the game is really unbalanced. Its too easy to dig through your deck and do whatever you want, where in Pokemon it takes a very long time to win a game (usually) since you have to charge up your monsters, get them out, and then slowly battle off your opponents cards. Pokemon games take some thought since unlike YGO, theres no monster removal and you cant take out someones entire life points (in this case prizes) in a single turn. I didnt like YGO because of the fact that it got too easy to get monsters off the field (effortlessly with only 1-2 cards at times), then dump all of your monsters on the field, and you can have access to defeating your opponent, and this can be done in the beginning of the game no less, theres no limit to when you can go all out (outside of the 1st turn) . In Pokemon theres proof that the games last since I've played games where I actually deck out, decking out in YGO hasnt happened since the game first started in the early 2000s.

The only flaws I see in Pokemon is a few things such as not drawing your draw power quick enough, getting a bad hand, only playing 1 game, coin flips, and your opponent getting their energy acceleration off too quickly but I can live with these things. I like Pokemon more since the better player can usually win most of the time unlike YGO where its so easy to lose to anything now a days no matter the skill level.

All card games have flaws since all of these games involve probability. Its virtually impossible for a game to be free of some flaws. Two players play a game, sadly theres only one winner. When two good players play, one has to lose. Some how its going to happen. There cant be a perfect card game, but more as one to where you can accept the flaws and want to play the game. Anything involving some sort of randomization is going to have its ups and downs.

 

[rcxd999]

I must say that the Exs and catchers at least make it fun. I've played ever since the first set came out and I must say this is the most fun format in ages. Sure it's predictable but until the SPs came out the games were much slower than they are now and when the Exs came out along with catchers it began spending much more money than I usually did because the format was so much more exciting. I know there are only 5 maybe 6 officially successful deck but where I play there are about 13 different decks and the people who don't play the officially successful decks still win sometimes. So in comment to what the worst format is, I think that is was the first format because so boring and uneventful.

 

[Otaku]

Thank you for your response FSULugia. I think we agree on some things, but may be having some communication issues. That which we didn't agree on... you're giving me an excuse to highlight.

For any and all reading this, all of this comparison with Yu-Gi-Oh is relevant because there are many "lessons" Yu-Gi-Oh didn't learn from Pokémon's past successes and failures, or perhaps the wrong lesson was learned.

The core rules of Yu-Gi-Oh... I can't remember if they were ever tweaked. However, blaming that for the game's infamous lack of balanced and one-sided games is at best one way of looking at it. Aspects of Yu-Gi-Oh that are out of control, however, are not fundamental game mechanics, present from the game's western debut.

When Fusion Monsters are must runs, it is because of the latest short cut or those that are obscenely overpowered (often both). The basic mechanic is not the issue. Ritual Monsters didn't come about in the west until I believe the game's third set, Magic Ruler (which might have been retroactively renamedSpell Ruler due to a dispute with Magic: The Gathering). Again, we basically got some "short cuts" for the mechanic, and/or some extremely powerful Ritual Monsters that ended up as part of ludicrously powerful decks.

Then we got Synchro Summons and later Xyz summons (I think that is what they are called - I had to drop the game before then). Seems to be the same issue as above, with cards improperly balanced given the mechanic. It is a shame to; the concept of an auxiliary deck for the main deck (I think the official name is now the "Extra Deck", when it used to be the "Fusion" deck) is intriguing.

Within the basic rules, however, I don't think there is an issue with things such as "unlimited" Special Summons and certainly not "unlimited" Spells... with the possible exception of the first turn (and since they make some cards that can be played during your opponent's turn, even that may not be a great concern).

Yu-Gi-Oh, as FSULugia brings up, never hit upon an idea like "Supporters"; introducing a new sub-class of card to keep the powerful effects players love, but prevent them from stacking each turn. Yu-Gi-Oh just periodically bans what is perceived to be "the worst offenders", and in some cases makes powerful cards part of a "theme" (often with the side effect of overpowering the theme instead of balancing the card).

I played Yu-Gi-Oh for years, and besides actual "mill" decks, decking out was a periodic occurrence. It was unusual in tournament play due to the time limit and best two of three nature; if you weren't a true "mill" deck (some of which were First Turn Wins!) then you only forced the opponent to deck out when it was "safe" to do so.

The "flaws" you cite are indeed partially due to luck, and I could add to them, but this post is long enough so I'll highlight one. TCGs by their nature have an inalienable degree of luck to them, but certain mechanics and card pools will promote it more than others. When we have a potent effect, especially ones that are "all or nothing" based on a coin flip, it adds more luck to the game. I am noticing that hitting Crushing Hammer is almost as important as hitting Pokémon Reversal once was.

Indeed, "Energy removal" is almost (but not quite) to Pokémon as Monster/Spell/Trap removal is to Yu-Gi-Oh, and Energy acceleration functions in Pokémon more like Special Summons in Yu-Gi-Oh.

 

[rcxd999]

Yu-gi-oh sucks because only one deck is played, the dread and annoying Exodia and so the game is now boring, broken and most of all what is the point of them selling Yu-Gi-Oh when a completely new card game like Vanguard can pass them in a matter of weeks?

 

[FSULugia]

Thank you for your response FSULugia. I think we agree on some things, but may be having some communication issues. That which we didn't agree on... you're giving me an excuse to highlight.

For any and all reading this, all of this comparison with Yu-Gi-Oh is relevant because there are many "lessons" Yu-Gi-Oh didn't learn from Pokémon's past successes and failures, or perhaps the wrong lesson was learned.

The core rules of Yu-Gi-Oh... I can't remember if they were ever tweaked. However, blaming that for the game's infamous lack of balanced and one-sided games is at best one way of looking at it. Aspects of Yu-Gi-Oh that are out of control, however, are not fundamental game mechanics, present from the game's western debut.

When Fusion Monsters are must runs, it is because of the latest short cut or those that are obscenely overpowered (often both). The basic mechanic is not the issue. Ritual Monsters didn't come about in the west until I believe the game's third set, Magic Ruler (which might have been retroactively renamedSpell Ruler due to a dispute with Magic: The Gathering). Again, we basically got some "short cuts" for the mechanic, and/or some extremely powerful Ritual Monsters that ended up as part of ludicrously powerful decks.

Then we got Synchro Summons and later Xyz summons (I think that is what they are called - I had to drop the game before then). Seems to be the same issue as above, with cards improperly balanced given the mechanic. It is a shame to; the concept of an auxiliary deck for the main deck (I think the official name is now the "Extra Deck", when it used to be the "Fusion" deck) is intriguing.

Within the basic rules, however, I don't think there is an issue with things such as "unlimited" Special Summons and certainly not "unlimited" Spells... with the possible exception of the first turn (and since they make some cards that can be played during your opponent's turn, even that may not be a great concern).

Yu-Gi-Oh, as FSULugia brings up, never hit upon an idea like "Supporters"; introducing a new sub-class of card to keep the powerful effects players love, but prevent them from stacking each turn. Yu-Gi-Oh just periodically bans what is perceived to be "the worst offenders", and in some cases makes powerful cards part of a "theme" (often with the side effect of overpowering the theme instead of balancing the card).

I played Yu-Gi-Oh for years, and besides actual "mill" decks, decking out was a periodic occurrence. It was unusual in tournament play due to the time limit and best two of three nature; if you weren't a true "mill" deck (some of which were First Turn Wins!) then you only forced the opponent to deck out when it was "safe" to do so.

The "flaws" you cite are indeed partially due to luck, and I could add to them, but this post is long enough so I'll highlight one. TCGs by their nature have an inalienable degree of luck to them, but certain mechanics and card pools will promote it more than others. When we have a potent effect, especially ones that are "all or nothing" based on a coin flip, it adds more luck to the game. I am noticing that hitting Crushing Hammer is almost as important as hitting Pokémon Reversal once was.

Indeed, "Energy removal" is almost (but not quite) to Pokémon as Monster/Spell/Trap removal is to Yu-Gi-Oh, and Energy acceleration functions in Pokémon more like Special Summons in Yu-Gi-Oh.

The rules of YGO arent sufficient for the current card pool since so many cards can be used over and over again with no limits. The only rules that ever got changed was priority, which that was always a weird rule, I never got what it was actually supposed to be, both ways it was ruled could be interpreted as right or wrong. If the game only allowed you to special summon twice a turn or only set two spell and traps a turn, there wouldnt be that many issues. Its too easy to drop a bunch of monsters, drop a backrow, and cruise to victory. I dont like how my opening hand in that game determines if the game will go on for a few turns or not. In Pokemon just by default, you have a certain amount of turns (unless you draw so bad), the game just cant abruptly end. I also dont like how in YGO everything is either lockdown or mass amounts of destruction, as in you drop something that negates all of your opponents spells/traps/monsters (like Shock Ruler, Heraklinos, Laggia, etc.) or drop things like Judgment Dragon, Dark Armed Dragon, Atlantians, things that shouldnt be so easy and its a free win unless your opponent has a counter which in that case the game was a coin flip.

I like how in Pokemon the monsters ALWAYS have to battle, theres no getting around having to fight another monster. In YGO, one on one battles dont happen as often as they should since theres so many shortcuts to it and many shortcuts to having shots at your opponents life points. I like YGO when it first started since that is how it was. Monsters almost always battled. You had monster removal but it was limited, very limited to the point to where monsters can stay on the field for multiple turns and certain spells,traps and monsters could do a limited amount of things.

But even with energy acceleration being around in Pokemon, its limited how much you can do. In YGO Special Summons win games all on their own since they can win the game that turn and thats my biggest problem. In Pokemon you could have 6 prizes left and a Ho-Oh coming back or recharging your Rayquaza still isnt enough. In Pokemon its more about the player who retains more advantage and makes the better plays that wins unlike in YGO to where you can lose control over the entire game in a single turn no matter how good you play. I had games in Pokemon where it didnt matter where I did, but thats rare. I feel in Pokemon I have control over my own destiny a majority of the time.

I dont think the games are similar really. YGO you can just blow monsters out of the way and win asap, in Pokemon, even if you drain your opponents resources, they have lots of ways of getting them back and time to do so and the monsters dont disappear, you cant avoid having to get through them. A big difference between YGO and Pokemon is card advantage, in Pokemon its less relevant, In Pokemon theres so many ways to change the amount of cards you have and sometimes having a bunch of Energies or dead trainers isnt really that good unlike YGO to where most of the time more cards is usually a tremendous advantage (unless your unlucky and they are all dead weight which is rare).

 

[Otaku]

I dont think the games are similar really.

Then I won't waste time with another post sure to become a wall of text. You can't Special Summon "a bunch of Monsters" and win in Pokémon with an all out blitz... but you don't lose in Yu-Gi-Oh for having no monsters in play; both games have unpalatable ways of losing first turn.

Similar does not mean "identical", and the more specialized rules you add (such as limiting how many Special Summons are allowed per turn or how many Spells/Traps one could play) are about as effective as Ban Lists. We have the (somewhat unfortunate) first turn rules now because of this; Pokémon needs to find a way to balance the first turn "organically" (for want of a better word).

Fiat rules are easier on the designers but harder on the players; building the game so that there is no problem is much harder on the designers but doesn't clutter up the rules for the players, and is the hallmark of skilled game design.