Pokémon TCG: Sword and Shield—Brilliant Stars

Jason K writes more propaganda

Status
Not open for further replies.
pokeball S said:
^ well maybe not aylam.... But also there are tons of great masters out there not recongnized on this list. I believe this was written when maybe ness wasnt fully thinking, i demand a rewrite!
Click to expand...
This kid I think is still easily the best senior in the game. Ya, he doesn't have a lot of history, but this season so far, nationals is the ONLY tourniment he didn't win, and he got 4th in it with a deck everyone though was crap (cursegar, which I knew he would run). He was also top of the ratings 2 years in a row, his ONLY 2 years playing. Aylam has a better rating then a lot of those guys on Jason K's list. And don't say that he is playing in an easier meta because the NE seniors have topped/won in large tourniments (nats/worlds) for the past 3 years so we're good. Aylam deserves to be on that list.
 
Sabett said:
What tier would you put torterra in? 2? 3? Even with if you consider it tier 2, which is pretty exaggerated that's really ridiculous to accomplish. Seen any torterra's t8ing recently other than that?
Click to expand...

Torterra made T8 in Canadian Nats 2010 for juniors
 
Last edited:
Sabett said:
What about that guy that won nats with torterra? That's gotta be the best player hands down. That's like winning worlds with magikarp and stuff.
Click to expand...

Thanks, lol :lol:
But honestly, I dont belong on this list at all :lol:

I consider myself pretty good in coming up with counter decks and stage 2s, but I have issues ever testing a deck I dont like, if everyone would be like me SP would probably see no play ever :p
IMO the best players have to be able to play any deck, come up with combos and use them, no matter how cheap they seem to be (sablelock? Flygonlock? eww...) and stuff like that. Definitly not me.
I tend to overtech a lot and Id rather stuff a deck to no ends before abandoning it (at least my pet decks)
And dont get me started on misplays ;P

Torterra is great right now and no and will hardly work next season :/

So Torterra in no way can be considered anything above a tier 3 deck. That being said, once a single Torterra UL is set-up, bringing it down becomes an almost impossible task for disruptive low hitting decks, and with Torterra SF killing off Sableye and Luxray for a DCE, that's where the deck becomes a contendor. The reason you don't see it T8ing anywhere else is because the few people who played it either played less than stellar lists, or they run into too many situations where disruption wins out. Yoshi, the guy who won with it, simply ran into the fewest games decided by someone holding a key Power Spray or T1 Judging. Infact, if you look at his report, he didn't play against a single Sablock deck(or Dialga Chomp for that matter), because it isn't the German ideal deck.

Not to say anything bad about Yoshi, he deserved the win : D Just saying that without LuxChomp disrupting and Sablock...being Sablock, set-up is a lot easier. He had the best deck for his games, but in no way the best deck for our metagame.

A really good read. That guy who has been T2 at nats for 5 years = BOSS
Click to expand...

A key powerspray doesnt matter if I get a somewhat acceptable start. Not to sure about Sableye but should be very doable. Dialgachomp as well. And IMO you didnt really get the deck :p
Sure some hands are unplayable / unbeatable, but I usually beat good luxchomp players if my opening is ok. Ive played aganst a few very good luxchomp players after worlds and I hardly lost at all.

Dunno but Im confident It can beat nearly any player with any deck there is with it (except a charizard deck or something :p) , and if you have a really good list it should be tier1/tier2, if you have a suboptimal list its probably tier 7/8 :p


:/ Totally forgot, I like the article, especially the strength/weakness thing, thats very interesting. Still at a certain point it becomes very hard to tell who is better since there is so much luck involved. I watched Yamato at worlds, he has a pretty impressive way of playing, but how did his game go?
His opponent rolled him colpletly with Legos, then he topdecks Cynthia and drops Claydol Flygon Weavile Vibrava...
 
I like the idea of highlighting top players, and what makes them special or unique; everyone seems to have a particular affinity for a type of deck or strategy.

But the Kobe and Lebron example is a little flawed, because the game of basketball doesn't factor in luck. Pokemon seems more akin to professional poker, where an excellent player can always beat an average player in the long run, but isn't guaranteed to win every tournament (or even more than one). But after many tournaments and several years, it becomes clear who the "best" players are.
 
First, I think this article, and the hype it induced, goes to show that players of the game like knowing more information about the community, and its accomplishment. I really feel that Pokemon can capitalize on it far more than they do currently with more in depth coverage, more player interviews, player statistics, maybe even a Hall of Fame like they have done with Magic. Magic even included those booster insert cards with pro players profiles in them. I'm not suggesting this out of ego ( me? an ego? Never! ) but because that kind of spotlight provides further motivation for players to " get there". It is the same thing as the Worlds decks, which I know a lot of people want to have made for them. By even artificially raising the level of prestige that goes along with winning tournaments, it incites encouragement within the common playerbase to want to reach that level. It is a cheap, easy way to further legitimize a longstanding franchise within the TCG "world".

In defense of the list: there are a lot of good players out there. I really do feel there is a VERY top of that list, and I think Jason hit most of them on the head. In the past few years, a number of players have really started to emerge, and I'm sure that in a few years we can certainly look forward to a number of them on the "greats" list. I really feel that multi format success is important to making that list, outside of just succeeding at multiple tournaments. Most of the players on that list have had success dating WAY back into even the WotC era for Pokemon.

The list appears to be primarily US players, but outside of the past few years, the US has been by far the most competitive area. Europe has grown drastically in the past few years in terms of competition, but time will tell which of the European players will rise to the top on an international level. I'd argue for Yamato's inclusion on that list, personally. Hes had plenty of great performances over many years, and that isn't even addressing his Japanese tournament repertoire either.
 
I completely agree as far as raising the level of player prestige currently in the game. I know that everyone hates the Pokemon and Magic comparisons, but I'd love to see Pokemon adapt some of Magic's style when it comes to notable players. Interviews, decklist reviews, and the like are tools that Magic uses to boost player prestige and that would fit perfectly in Pokemon. Featured matches and the worlds decks are awesome, but in my mind there are so many more possibilities. :)
 
Yeah, I know some people inherently dislike the Magic comparisons because for some reason theres always been some underlying dislike between major TCGs ( YGO players hating Pokemon and Magic, Magic players disliking Pokemon and YGO, Pokemon disliking Magic and YGO, etc ) but its stupid to allow that irrational ( or sometimes rational ) dislike to prevent successful models from being adopted. If someone else does it first, it doesn't matter, if they are doing it better, it is still better. I think Magic hit the nail on the head in that regard. They didn't have a franchise to thrive off of, so they had to use other methods to enforce their image. Pokemon has every resource available to them to do the same thing, I just get a bit annoyed that they don't make that effort. I understand that there is a different "target audience" that is Pokemons primary goal, but it isn't like its an issue of " one vs the other" at all. It should be extremely low cost to branch out into the competitive market.
 
I completely agree. I've always wanted Pokemon to have a bigger stage feel. I don't play Magic currently, but whenever I talk about it with friends or watch some videos on YouTube, it's legit like watching a sport, haha. They have announcers talking about past wins/tops of the players, the successes of their current deck, the plays they're making, etc. I know that's a bit nerdy to some but it really makes the game feel like a bigger deal, and makes the players feel important too. I know if I were playing Magic I would strive to be playing at that level, therefore I would be playing more, attending more events, buying more product, etc. and I don't see why the same can't be said for Pokemon.
 
This list is great, but the only problem is, as a senior......... I don't care about these players. I care about players in my division.
 
I don't see why you wouldn't care about the best players in the game just because they're not in your division. Why not take a look at the players who have accomplished the most in the game? Plus, you'll eventually be in Masters and might be playing against some of these players.
 
Elite_4_Allen said:
This list is great, but the only problem is, as a senior......... I don't care about these players. I care about players in my division.
Click to expand...

This is why the list should only be Masters, Juniors/Seniors come and go but Masters are always there.
 
evil psyduck said:
You should care about them. You could be playing them when you get to masters.
Click to expand...
And that could fluctuate ridiculously within the scope of a few years. They could quit, they could be outclassed, and the format could shift drastically over a dozen times. It would be like players in Japan watching our format to be a better player in their own.
 
Xicious said:
I don't like the fact that he mentioned only his local area players and his team mates.
Click to expand...

I feel like that criticism makes most sense in terms of Chuck's appearance on the list and Gino's absence. Really though, Lafonte is very large, and has a degree of selectivity. These combined make sure that Jason's 'teammates' are likely to end up here.

Fulop spoke to the WotC era, and I think its a tough call: not everyone was playing then, old success should count, but new players shouldn't have that held against them. Do people try and adjust for this in pro-sports? I don't think so, time to get over it, old events do matter.

Also, when considering successful seniors doesn't Curran Hill belong on the list even though he's aged up? Orion Craig also comes to mind. Jun Hasebe?
 
Sabett said:
And that could fluctuate ridiculously within the scope of a few years. They could quit, they could be outclassed, and the format could shift drastically over a dozen times. It would be like players in Japan watching our format to be a better player in their own.
Click to expand...

I not moving on to masters sorry. never.
 
I agree with Elite 4 Allen. Moving to Masters requires an increase in maturity as well as skill. This is why I'm going to be stuck a Senior forever.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top