Pokémon TCG: Sword and Shield—Brilliant Stars

over tech

tehmoe

tehmoe

New Member
Now i know we have probably discussed this a bajillion times, but i think its an important topic to discuss.

Is it worth it to tech? It's obvious that teching drops the consistency of the deck, but how much? is it worth it? Do you think that not teching will cost you important matches?

these are questions any player/deck builder should ask themselves.

personally, i'm caught in the middle. I have the feeling i need to tech, but end up regretting it later for some reason. For example, i built palkia lock, we all know what and how many techs can go in there, it's almost ridiculous. The same goes for plenty of S2 decks as well as a few other SP builds.

I have played both consistency and with techs, i find that i do better with them than without them, but lose to some easier match ups because i wasn't consistent enough...

What's your take on teching. what shoulg go in what decks? does knowing the meta effect what you tech or does it not matter as you go for the consistency build?
 
for teching, i go with that one tech that makes your decks "autoloss" matchup better.
either that, or you tech for that one deck that in your metagame that seems to be that most popular.



you can't tech for every deck in the format, and alot of people tend to forget that.
 
I usually only tech after I've created and tested, and come out with a consistent deck. That way, I know I can't screw things up too badly. Put in a tech and retest.

Some reasons to tech:
- against your weakness
- against the meta game
- to get a quick prize card (i.e, crobat)
- to donk (i.e., sableye + special dark energy)
- to stall (i.e., Spiritomb (AR) or Mr Mime (MT) for decks that take longer to set up)
 
Yarac said:
I usually only tech after I've created and tested, and come out with a consistent deck. That way, I know I can't screw things up too badly. Put in a tech and retest.

Some reasons to tech:
- against your weakness
- against the meta game
- to get a quick prize card (i.e, crobat)
- to donk (i.e., sableye + special dark energy)
- to stall (i.e., Spiritomb (AR) or Mr Mime (MT) for decks that take longer to set up)
Click to expand...

Couldn't have said it better myself. There are a lot of benefits to teching depending on what you use. But there's no magical balance. It's a matter of what deck you're running, the specific build you've created, your metagame, your play style, all sorts of things. It's a very individual question of how much to tech your deck out. Consistency is key to building a winner, so balancing your goals between what you're trying to accomplish with your deck as a whole and the reasons listed above (plus others) is a crucial part of deck building.

In the end though, what works for one person may not work for the next. Overteching to the point where it wrecks your consistency is to be avoided, but you want to do everything you can to give yourself a chance to win.
 
I've sometimes thought of how a deck would work with no Unown G's, no Azelf, no weakness covering pokemon, no special energies to get out of situations, no Night Maintanence or other recovery cards, and just setup and execution cards. When it worked, you would probably feel like the deck was unbeatable, but when it failed you would probably feel like an idiot. Sort of like All-in Machamp or something. Either you win fast or scoop.
 
Many decks have interesting TecH cards, but I think it's very easy to get bogged down in trying to over-TecH a deck. Granted, there are some decks that are basically all TecH cards, such as SP toolbox style decks.

If a deck gets too clunky, there are probably too many TecH cards in it.
 
Noah121 said:
Many decks have interesting TecH cards, but I think it's very easy to get bogged down in trying to over-TecH a deck. Granted, there are some decks that are basically all TecH cards, such as SP toolbox style decks.

If a deck gets too clunky, there are probably too many TecH cards in it.
Click to expand...

Just curious, only sort of related, why do you write 'TecH' instead of 'tech'? Is there an abbreviation you're alluding to or?
 
Team Japan almost swept all 3 divisions last year with an SP deck that was teched like crazy with at least 7-8 1 of's. It won Seniors, Juniors, and got 4th in Masters.

Tech decks have always been good when done right, look back a few years and you'll notice a trend.
 
Techs are used for two reasons:

1. A matchup problem.
2. A functional problem.

Techs can come in the form of a Pokemon, a specifice trainer/supporter, or an energy card!

Example of a Matchup Problem tech:
-- Promo Toxicroak G. It's used to KO a Luxray GL after bright look is used.
-- Toxicroak G (psychic) / Skunktank G -- used to one shot a Machamp after they've used "Take out" on one of your SPs.
-- MewTwo LvX -- Used to slow down SP decks that outspeed your stage 2 setup.
- Ditto - Used for Kingdra and Gengar matchups (most popularly). It's a super-fast way to fight Kingdra with Kingdra and Gengar with Gengar!

Example of a Funtional tech:

- Weaville SW / Moonlight Stadium - These cards help you free retreat high retreat-cost pokemon AND accelate energy for 3 energy attackers.

- Rotom MD - Throw 2 quick energies onto high-energy attackers who lack a decent 1-2 energy attack.

- Flygon - Another way to add free retreat to your attacking pokemon

Example of teching with Trainers/Supporters/Tools:

Unown G - protects Claydol from "drag-up" attacks and Shadow Room
Lucky Egg - Pop this on your Spiritomb/Sabeleye/Jirachi starter and run a Claydol-less deck if you're in a heavy power-locking meta (i.e. Lots of Regigias, Palkia G X/Legos , or lots of SP variants).
Warp Energy - Great against Luxray's "bright look" , Flytrap, and GliscorTomb that attempt to "lock" your active in position. Also used if you have Multiple LvXs that you need to level up and bench (i.e. Heatran, Leafeon, Blaziken LvX)

There IS a problem with trying to tech for EVERYTHING that is in the "What Won " thread. Unless you just testplay 24/7, you end up slowing your deck down to a crawl which leaves your main attacker ... well... in the deck!

I, personally, don't even tech for matchups. I tend to tech for functionality only.
I've found that so many others over-tech, that I could win on speed alone as ALL 60 of my cards have synergy while the opponent is probably working with 50 cards and 10 tech cards (tech energy, tech pokemon, tech supporter/trainer, tech Stadium).

Not teching (much) makes Uxie drops and Cosmic Powers much more productive.
 
thanks for all the info so far, it helps make those crucial 2-5 cards that go in a deck.

also you should put this in your sig, "through expert belt, all pokemon attacks look good!"
 
Rogue Archetype said:
I, personally, don't even tech for matchups. I tend to tech for functionality only.
I've found that so many others over-tech, that I could win on speed alone as ALL 60 of my cards have synergy while the opponent is probably working with 50 cards and 10 tech cards (tech energy, tech pokemon, tech supporter/trainer, tech Stadium).

Not teching (much) makes Uxie drops and Cosmic Powers much more productive.
Click to expand...

I fully support this idea. Very rarely do I use specific techs in any of my decks. Rather, cards that help the deck as a whole are my favorite techs. The most "out there" tech I've used in a while would be Promocroak G. Other than that, I try to keep my consistency as high as possible.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top