Pokémon TCG: Sword and Shield—Brilliant Stars

Japan's time called procedure... why not that way here?

Status
Not open for further replies.
To be honest, a +1 turn will not remove all stalling/slow play.
I really think you need +3 turns to achieve that.
But if I had the option between +1 turn or the current way, I would take the +1 option.

Has there been anyone out there who currently supports the Time is called procedure as it currently is being conducted, or is this a very rare issue where there is unanimous agreement on the gym that a change needs to be made to the rules about how a game is resolved when time is called?

If so, then synching our rules to Japan's seems the be the most logical move to make inorder to solve this issue.
 
Lia, you ask if this is a good thing. Well, right now it seems interesting. I keep asking the question because I'm exploring what people are going to think about +1 if the person going first gets that turn. Not what I think about it, what others think. I'm not making a point, just asking the question. You gave a precise answer. Thanks!

Wasn't Japan asked to clarify this, and if yes why wasn't this +1 turn not mentioned from their side.

PUI makes the rulings on game rules, OP sets the tournament rules (which, actually, is what we are talking about). If there is a question, PUI contacts PCL. TC doesn't have contact with PCL for these matters.

You refer to this ruling perhaps, which is now in the tournament rules document,

Q. In the new Tournament rules, it is said that when time is called, the active player is allowed to finish his or her turn. After this, do players still check for Burn, Poison, and other relevant Special Conditions, or is the game over before the Special Conditions can take place?
A. When time is called, the end of the game would trigger at the end of the current player's turn after resolving all of the effects that occur during that player's turn, but before addressing any actions that happen between turns such as Special Conditions. (Oct 16, 2003 PUI Rules Team)


As you can see, that was 2003... when did +1 go into effect in Japan?
 
if there was +1 at nats this year I would have made the cut w/ a 7-2 record and maybe do well enough to get an invite. I agree that if I had to choose w/ +1 or now I'd go +1.
 
I think after so many turns, if the player that went first also has the last turn thanks to the time + 1, then I wouldn't care at all. It promotes at least a little fairer game, so I am all up for it.
 
Pffffffff time flies, was that ruling so long ago, I am getting old.

Just to make it clear for me and possible readers, WHO are in the PUI ruling Team?
WHO are the ones having contact with Japan?
The only person I can think of is Jimmer S.
Perhaps he can ask PCL when this +1 ruling was made.

But if this +1 is only a matter of OP, should wbe ask Mike/Dave to review it?
I find this "difference" in how the game ends a very important one.
 
Just to make it clear for me and possible readers, WHO are in the PUI ruling Team?
As of right now, TC and a PUI representative.

WHO are the ones having contact with Japan?
The only person I can think of is Jimmer S.
Jimmer has been the PUI representation on the Rules Team. He reports to a higher up inside PUI. Not sure if any of this is confidential, so I'll leave it at that for now.
Not sure if Jimmer sent questions directly or if they were filtered up the line.
Right now, Jimmer is on leave, so our contact is with his boss. Things are a bit out of whack right now as we work out an effecient method to get rulings out regularly. So this is not a priority, Rules Team-wise.

But if this +1 is only a matter of OP, should wbe ask Mike/Dave to review it?
I find this "difference" in how the game ends a very important one.

Since it is Tourney rules, it very well could be a POP decision rather than a PUI R&D decision.
 
'Pop.....sounds like a possible poll then? (If TC has imput on it) Interesting discussion though. I dont get to play anymore really, but IMO, it wouldnt matter to me if the player going 1st also got the last turn too. Happens already, right???

Keith
 
'Pop.....sounds like a possible poll then? (If TC has imput on it) Interesting discussion though. I dont get to play anymore really, but IMO, it wouldnt matter to me if the player going 1st also got the last turn too. Happens already, right???

Keith

Very good point Lawman. It is not like our rule now is, When Time is called you check to see who's turn it is. IF the player who went 2nd is in the middle of their the turn, then the game is over after they attack (unless the game goes into sudden death) But if time is called during the 1st players turn, then the 2nd player gets on additional turn before the game ends (unless the game goes into sudden death)

But as that is not the way the current rule works at all then the proposed question of "Would you be upset if Time +1 turn would give the 1st player an additional turn question" Is actually a red herring as that situation occurs now and would occur reguardless of if we used Japan's end of game rule or not. So it really is not any kind of issue at all.
 
Last edited:
For those who want the Japanese style of OP to be introduced worldwide, I want to give my opinion:

The PCL staff is some of the best, most elite tournament staff imaginable. They run GIGANTIC events very smoothly. They're full of Pokemon TCG wisdom and they are professionals, literally. Also, Pokemon in Japan have amazing events for new and casual players, something we lack in the US/INTL OP scene.

However ...

Japanese OP system is NOT better than Pokemon USA's, in my opinion. Pokemon USA have done an amazing job at constantly improving OP ever since they saved this game in 2003. We have an almost perfect system for competitive events, with just a very few very minor flaws.

Japan's OP is truly excellent too, but it has its flaws. I talked to a friend who had been to the Kansai Battle Road both days (it was a 2-day event) and he mentioned how the incredibly amount of people - about a thousand, he claimed - didn't work in the tournament structure the tourney was held in.

In this Battle Road, people had to stand in line to get into "stage 1", the win three matches in a row to proceed to the next stage, and eventually the "playoff stage" that would crown the winner. Everyone who lost a match in this first zone had to go and stand in line again. The lines grew absolutely ridicolous after a while, so in the end, you could just give up once you lost one match - there was no way you'd get finished queing before the tournament hall closed down for the evening.

When comparing this to the very smoothly run US Nationals, that had about the same number of people, I see several benefits of the Pokemon USA way of doing things ... And apparently some players at the Kansai Battle Road actually talked about how thety wished they could just run the tournament using Swiss pairings and let everyone play at the same time.
 
To be honest, a +1 turn will not remove all stalling/slow play.


IMO, +1 turn to time will surely speed the game up.
Both players will want time to be called on the others turn, so they can have one more turn in.
In turn, making both players play more efficient and speedy to insure time isn't called on their turn.

As I said before, "This game is a turned based game, not a time based game for the win."
 
IMO, +1 turn to time will surely speed the game up.
Both players will want time to be called on the others turn, so they can have one more turn in.
In turn, making both players play more efficient and speedy to insure time isn't called on their turn.

As I said before, "This game is a turned based game, not a time based game for the win."

I like this way of thinking. The game is MEANT to be played to completion. Time based wins were a necessity when OP introduced the tournement scene. Time restraints are a necessary evil, but the more turns you get to play, the more likely the game will actually end the way it is supposed to.....by decking, benching or taking all the prizes!

Tego: I dont think the rest of the World wants the OP Japanese style (single elim., long lines to just play a battle, zones, etc). BUT the mechanic of the end time is interesting. Japan doesnt seem to care if the player going 1st gets the last turn also, just that when time is called, finish that turn and then you have a +1 situation. Question for you Tego (if you know the answer).....how does Japan handle the calling of time when it occurs between turns? (ie I announce attack and am placing my damage counters and oppo hasn't drawn yet and time is called) Does it still remain just +1 and they let oppo have last turn and no more?

Keith
 
Tego, no one is asking for a carbon copy of Japanese Organized play, I agree with you completely the tournament structure overseen by PUI/POP is awesome. What people are asking is that the rules of the game be the same everywhere. IF Japan has Time called + one final turn for each player, then that is the way it should be here as well. It is the same game and the rules should be consistent where ever it is played.
 
Pokemon USA have done an amazing job at constantly improving OP ever since they saved this game in 2003. We have an almost perfect system for competitive events...

Both players will want time to be called on the others turn, so they can have one more turn in. In turn, making both players play more efficient and speedy to insure time isn't called on their turn.

Two quotes in a row that are sig worthy, if I liked quotes in my sig.

BTW, looks like no one is going to argue for the baseball-style, 'go second, get last ups' approach... I wish I could say, speak now or forever hold your peace, but as Lia & Keith note, there is no 'last ups' system now, so I'm hoping there will be no subsequent uproar.

no one is asking for a carbon copy of Japanese Organized play

Maybe not, but many are supporting their argument for this with 'our OP should be the way it is in Japan'. For those that have been following Tego's reports closely, that's the wrong support for this change, because you wouldn't want it to be that way. (e.g. I'm always happy to see the look when remind a new player/parent after losing the first game they are not out ... many just want to play some matches!). I'm more aligned with: "the game rules should match the way the game is made by the creators" (and as possible, set distribution) but POP should choose the best from Japan OP to continue improving ours. I would guess they are looking at the things POP does well, too.
 
My point has clearly been misunderstood. I was not debating which OP is better... How would I know which system works, I don't play!!

My problem is not even with POP per se, it's with whichever muppet thought it would be a good idea to create the unique situation where PUI does things differently from PCL, but does not have (as far as I can see) any real powers to just change things.

It seems to me that Japan just gets on with things. Security alerts? No biggie... lets change the tournament structure. I just cannot see POP being able to act so fast and decisively.

Japan get better products, more promos (still don't get this one, and also why we then have to get them released into our sets. Takes the fun out of it IMO), etc. etc., and I'm just becoming sick of it! Sometimes its a really arbitrary decision as to what we get and when (though this has been happening less and less on a card-to-card basis with PUI. I definitely appreciate being able to get more promos via the sets.) As I have said before, I'm not denying PUI have done great things for the game. I'm saying that they have this in spite of having to do things differently from Japan.

Note: Another point people seem to misunderstand is that they assume I mean by this that 'oh, Japan must be perfect'. They most certainly aren't. (Don't even get me started on what I think about all the random decks, opposition decks, starter decks, entry packs etc. etc.) What I mean is that the current system creates unnecessary work and complexity. And it very clearly shows in the way the TCG is promoted here and in Japan.

Let me put it this way: so few people here care about Japanese promos, etc. etc. because they aren't going to be able to get their hands on them. And why should they care if they don't collect? But it also means that just because of where you live, you aren't getting cards, even though the gameis supported both where you live and in Japan. It's just bizarre!

As for the actual topic on hand, this might be a stupid question, but if the issue is slow play and stalling, can't people just adapt their play so that when time is called, they will be the one with the final turn? Or is that just really difficult to do?
 
Last edited:
Time+1 works to negate the 'suicide play': if you are tied on prizes and time is called you can make a mad play for the last prize that does get you the last prize but at the cost of losing the game were it to continue beyond your turn. Time+1 does nothing for any other ending that I can think of. The 'suicide play' entered the game with the EXs and their two prize cost. The EXs will be gone from modified soon and with them goes the suicide play. So I'm left struggling with just what does Time+1 actually fix in the anticipated DPon format for next season?


The situation where if the game were allowed to continue to 6 prizes would result in a different outcome is always present no matter how Time is administered. Time+X does not change that or the possibility that the 6 prize outcome would be different. every time I think about this I always end up with the conclusion that in a timed game players are allowed to win on time.
 
Nopoke, what is your opinion on the Mob2099 quote that Bulbasnore posted on the previous page, then? I agree with you that "the situation where if the game were allowed to continue to 6 prizes would result in a different outcome is always present no matter how Time is administered", but at the same time I feel very strongly that anything that reduces stalling would be good. Stalling is an awful thing, and if we can make it less benefitial, we should.
 
Eskil, I'd be very happy if +1 did reduce stalling. It would be nice if players didn't drop their pace because getting the last turn was such a big advantage in close games. The slow play that I've seen affected more than just the last turn, it had usually set in many turns before the end. Would the desire to have the last turn in time+1 be enough to shift players away from slow play? I don't know, primarily because I don't know if the motivation for any current drop in pace is to have the game end on your turn.

Mob2099s' comment on players wanting the last turn is the best arguement that I've seen so far for Time+1. (It certainly is an arguement against Time+even-number_of_turns)
 
So it is possible to play 'strategically' to 'force' yourself getting that extra turn? Or can you just not plan too far ahead in Pokémon?

I ask because if certain matchups are standard (i.e. you know what to expect from that deck), surely you'd be able to see how things pan out ahead of time (to an extent obviously, luck plays a part). Thus you'd be able to use this rule to gain an advantage.

Now is that within SotG or not?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top