Pokémon TCG: Sword and Shield—Brilliant Stars

OP changes

Status
Not open for further replies.
I agree with Shaw, Players should be rewarded within a certain amount of wins. Cities is a great start. However, POP should give you more stuff through player Rewards when you win tournaments like that. For example, an exclusive deck case to store all of your decks, or even a small backpack. IMO, this would attract more people and will make this game more interesting to play.

-Peter
 
I like the idea of points giving out to players that do well, but I don't like the idea of only the person winning getting points. Top 4/2 at regionals is still very good, heck top 16 isn't bad at all at regionals. Maybe have like 10 points for a win, 5 for 2nd, 2-3 for 3rd, and 1 for 4, 5, 6, 7, 8th. I think that'd be the most fair so if you top cut a lot, you can still earn the cool gear, but the people that win tournaments get a lot more points.
 
Blastoise-shellshocker said:
I agree with Shaw, Players should be rewarded within a certain amount of wins. Cities is a great start. However, POP should give you more stuff through player Rewards when you win tournaments like that. For example, an exclusive deck case to store all of your decks, or even a small backpack. IMO, this would attract more people and will make this game more interesting to play.

-Peter
Click to expand...

I don't think we need expensive stuff like backpacks and big fancy deckboxes (though the Worlds ones were sweet and I would love to have them), but I think it would be more realistic for stuff like promos and sleeves (things PUI already makes en masse) to be created. And they already have the designs for the cards and sleeves...sooo...not too difficult. Please please.
 
Winter = Cities (kind of like Battle Road?)
Spring = Battle Road
Summer = States Regionals Nationals?
 
I told you so! I'm actually very impressed with the K value rating ideas though. As long as CCs aren't TOO weighted, I really love this idea. This is the way it SHOULD be!

EDIT: One more thing, does "top players" for Nats mean just 1st place or more?
 
Bolt said:
Shaw broke the format.

Ranking invites means people with money to travel go to worlds, unless I'm missing that there's some kind of cap on how many events can count to your point total. Sux.
Click to expand...

I truly hope something will be said concerning this. I, for one, don't have either the time nor money to travel to 15 different States in order to play in as many Premier Events I may need in order to secure a trip. I was banking on the one Gym Challenge I attended this past season in order to get a trip to Worlds, and I was able to win it. And though I'm a highly ranked player, I doubt that I've been to as many events as others have this past season. So yeah, I hope someone can comment on this worry that many are having.

On a more positive note, I am glad to see that OP is implementing changes. They do an awesome job at what they do, and I'm sure they're only trying to make the game better for everyone. So let's cross our fingers and see how this next season goes. :thumb:

edit: Just so I don't sound so greedy, the "trip" factor is not the only reason I'm concerned about this. Though I would love to earn a trip to Hawaii, I play the game because I enjoy playing it and because I enjoy helping others have fun. I'm more worried about the system giving an unfair advantage to those with more $$$, a problem that our society has quite enough of already.
 
Last edited:
The only part of all this that worries me is the total number of spots at worlds. I hope it doesn't become so exclusive that the majority of people don't even try.

But I agree, a promo/rewards system would be great - as I've said many, many times on the op boards. It would give players who probably are NOT going to worlds a chance to still earn something cool.
 
Doesn't it seem like Japan has basically taken over our OP?

Either our OP is conforming to Japan or Japan is forcing some changes. Hmm..

Also, countinental rankings will be in favor of Japan and Australia (If they put Australia under Oceania and not Asia). And possibly the US. Those countries definitely have a lot more events than any other country on their respective continents.

Overall, this just seems to be trying to fix what isn't broken.
 
Hiya,

Well...I have to say, I love the new OP.
Gives more chances for overseas people to go through, and next year is Hawaii!
Too bad there's no Grinder though...But a shorter worlds could be great.

Few question:
1. What's a k-value?
2. It says at the bottom EVERYBODY who is invited receives a travel award...Including overseas?
3. Is the ranking system on MyPokemon will be gone too?

cya.
 
I REALLY dont like this. I think they should just keep it they way it is.Why put in Hawaii if they cant afford to bring in the amount of people they bring in?(Which is the whole reason why I think they are doing this)IMO, this hurts Pokemon. Mainly the people who play EVERY WEEK in a sanctioned tourny.I cant win EVERY single tourny can I?NO!Sure there is league, but not all the good players who I want to play against go to league, just the tourny!I dont mind the age group changes because I stay in the same age group, all it does is keep they good 11-14 kids out of 15+ for another year:p

But as the old sayin goes"Dont fix somthing that ain't broke!"

PS. can someone post what it says?I cant read it for some reason.
 
I like the no grinder thing. However the points/rating system will be a nightmare and really unfair to those with less money if not done right.

So everyone who wants to play Pokemon now has to waste their 4th of July weekend at a National Tournament instead of spending it with family? And if you are a good player and your family can not take the vacation time for this AND for Worlds then you lose out? What about those that travel to different states and go to multiple events get more points? Or is it like a Chess system? I would hate to see it boil down to "he who has the time and money wins".

I fear this year will be a hard and unfair year. Though I do like the idea of just 64 at worlds. I think POP should take a look at where the most people and cards are sold and cater to those environments.
 
Kaitos said:
Hiya,

Well...I have to say, I love the new OP.
Gives more chances for overseas people to go through, and next year is Hawaii!
Too bad there's no Grinder though...But a shorter worlds could be great.

Few question:
1. What's a k-value?
2. It says at the bottom EVERYBODY who is invited receives a travel award...Including overseas?
3. Is the ranking system on MyPokemon will be gone too?

cya.
Click to expand...

1. The maximum number of ranking points that can be won or lost in a match.
2. That's what it says.
3. It will probably be replaced by the new premier system.

Of course, people who traveled extensively in previous years had an invite advantage anyway because they could attend more qualifying events. However, PUI needs to avoid the perception that invites are "for sale" to anyone willing to put in the time and money. Such a perception would in my view tarnish the family-friendly image of the game.
 
Last edited:
Corflu said:
I like the no grinder thing. However the points/rating system will be a nightmare and really unfair to those with less money if not done right.

So everyone who wants to play Pokemon now has to waste their 4th of July weekend at a National Tournament instead of spending it with family? And if you are a good player and your family can not take the vacation time for this AND for Worlds then you lose out? What about those that travel to different states and go to multiple events get more points? Or is it like a Chess system? I would hate to see it boil down to "he who has the time and money wins".

I fear this year will be a hard and unfair year. Though I do like the idea of just 64 at worlds. I think POP should take a look at where the most people and cards are sold and cater to those environments.
Click to expand...

They already do, and have been doing so for awhile now. Just a neat little fact I learned. The players make up a small percentage of sales. Mostly the sales of Pokemon come from children who dont even play or have heard of the cards but dont play and buy them, parents willing of course.

I like the Idea of having a new type rating system. And K-Values to match the events.

YAY:clap:
 
I hope that PUI thinks this thru very thoroughly.

"Invites awarded by continental rankngs versus global rankings."

At last check, there are 7 continents. One filled with penguins so let's say 6.

64 per age group leaves 10.666 (?) entrants per continent per age group.

The continental ranking must be weighed with the total population that is registered in the POP system.

For example, if the North American continent has 1000 players eligible for Premier Ranking (i.e. in the POP system) only 10.6 (?) kids get in.

If Africa has 20 players and 10.6 (?) kids get in, then the percentage of people who are eligible per continent is skewed.

I appreciate the desirement for a more diverse and global format, however, the invites should be considered on a basis of total population of elibible players - not a simple division by continents.

Thoughts?
 
Corflu said:
Or is it like a Chess system? I would hate to see it boil down to "he who has the time and money wins".
Click to expand...
I've said it before (and got flamed) and I will say it again (and get flamed again), this is how the game is right now. When LBS came out, who were the wons winning the cities/states? The ones that could buy the Blastoise/Steelix/Lugia/Latias/Mew/etcs. And when one of those players didn't win, they would just go the next day to another tournament in another state. How many states were won by people in their state this year? How many gym challenges were won by people in the close area around that area? Not many I would think (might be wrong though). I'm reminded of William Hung (great guy as I've heard). He played in a stadium challenge (or was it another tournament like a gym challenge?), lost, then went to another one, lost, flew over to another one, lost, and went to another one, and finally won his trip to Nationals(or was it worlds?). Either way, the game has always shined on those who had the money to buy all the cards in multiples and who have the time and money to go to tournaments outside their state and across the nation.

But it's this way in every card game and I don't see it changing one bit anytime soon. Only under this system, how bad it is will be easier to see.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top