RULES UPDATE: Game two tie breaker changed. +3 Clarified

[eriknance]

ETA: It's not the rule that affects the format, it is the players' responses to the rule.

Rules don't affect the format? What?

Also, I honestly don't understand why you (along with others in this thread) are trying to defend this rule change. When many, many people who voice concern over this issue seem to think that the old rule was better, are you jumping in to argue just for laughs? When there's a rule in place that nobody seems to have a problem with, why take a step backwards? It just doesn't make any sense.

Your argument seems to be something like, "Well, there won't be many games where this will apply, so stop complaining." But why go through the trouble of changing a rule that has no problems to begin with? Why risk that possibility of having a lot of people get messed up in the top cut because of this rule change? What if it actually does become a big problem? I know you said they may change the rule back, but they may not. And like I said, they could avoid the problem altogether by just leaving the rule alone.

Also, your soup and chef analogy doesn't really work here. There's nothing possibly "delicious" about this decision. Even baby mario (who himself said he hates people who whine) said he doesn't like the rule change. To me, the chef is announcing that his soup may or may not have rat meat in it. I don't have to see it to know that I don't want it!

Stop defending a step backwards. The rule was fine the way it was.

 

[Magnechu]

Good post Erik^^

ETA: It's not the rule that affects the format, it is the players' responses to the rule.

Absolutely untrue. Rules are a HUGE part in what makes a format/metagame. If fossils didn't give up prizes anymore (like it was in the past), for example, some fossil decks might be playable right now.

 

[NoPoke]

Espeon I'd rather not argue with you on this forum. I hate an appeal to experience but I'm going to leave it at that on this board. I've run lots and lots of 45 minute best of three matches and this change means I won't be running that format any more. This rule turns that format into a "slow" players paradise.

Yes I would say that this rule would have changed battle road outcomes at the individual match level. Not the eventual winner as from what I can tell SP reigned supreme in the UK battle roads.

 

[Scipio]

Espeon, you want concrete answers?

Regigigas. Steelix. Tyranitar. Abomasnow. ANY FORM OF SET UP DECK has became completely USELESS due to this rulechange. While these weren't generally considered Tier 1 decks, they WERE considered to be contenders, in particular with the new TR cards in place.
THERE is your concrete answer.

 

[baby mario]

I would like a concrete answer from Espeon on what good the rule change will do.

It seems like the best defence of it is 'well, you can't yet physically PROVE it will be as bad as you think'.

 

[Xicious]

If you're playing a slow set up deck than why not just work it out and make time be called during game 1 making that the only game that was played.

I don't feel regigigas should be on that list it sets up as quick as gyarados.

 

[Scipio]

If you're playing a slow set up deck than why not just work it out and make time be called during game 1 making that the only game that was played.

I don't feel regigigas should be on that list it sets up as quick as gyarados.

Because the opponent can scoop with only 3 minutes remaining? Which is why the LOSER is the one controlling the clock and not the WINNING party? I mean I only repeated this argument about 10 times but it still seems to be quite elusive to grasp for some people

Regigigas cannot win Sudden Deaths, this is why I included it on the list.

 

[Ze Quidinateur]

^Unown Q + Expert belt can donk oddishes....

But, I agree. This rule murders a lot of fun decks. Most of all, I hate how they give spread Solrock, Gengar Prime and DCL to play with, and then kill it with the new rules. Spread is Dead. Again.

 

[espeon200]

@nopoke: Thank you. I will take your word for it, and I apologize for being so combative about it.

@The_Lurb: I was not attempting to play Devil's advocate. I honestly think that players are freaking out about the rule change when in reality it's not going to be as big an issue as everyone makes it out to be.

@erik & Magnechu: I misspoke. Yes the rule has the capability to change things, but I think this rule in particular doesn't *have* to change anything as, like I said I don't think that it will be as big an issue in actual playtime. Discussing it, though, brings it into the light and tells every scrub player who might have netdecked a slower deck that their choice is invalid when that's not guaranteed. But as I said, I'm quitting this debate. I agree that you are right and I look forward to Cities which will be dominated by SP... like they were already going to be.

@baby mario: You're right, I can't prove that it's going to make the game better. I'm not a staff member from TCPi, and I have no idea why they made this change. My concrete answer: I don't know.

 

[Xicious]

I still think that if your deck takes an hour to win one match then there's something wrong with it.

 

[Scipio]

I still think that if your deck takes an hour to win one match then there's something wrong with it.

Uuuuuugh....

Why. Dont. You. READ.

If I play Kingdra and you a slower deck, I WILL TAKE MY TIME ON MY TURNS. This will result in the game taking so much longer, which causes these situations. That goes for ANY DECK THAT WOULD BE SLOWER THEN MINE. Not just for Steelix. Not just for spread. Not just for Tyranitar. ANYTHING.

Faster decks play better the first 10 minutes. That is a well known fact. After that, slower decks can take over. And once that starts happening - THE PLAYER OF THE FASTER DECK CAN AND WILL SLOWPLAY.

Just capitalizing the important parts since some folks don't seem to get it.

 

[Xicious]

Uuuuuugh....

Why. Dont. You. READ.

If I play Kingdra and you a slower deck, I WILL TAKE MY TIME ON MY TURNS. This will result in the game taking so much longer, which causes these situations. That goes for ANY DECK THAT WOULD BE SLOWER THEN MINE. Not just for Steelix. Not just for spread. Not just for Tyranitar. ANYTHING.

Faster decks play better the first 10 minutes. That is a well known fact. After that, slower decks can take over. And once that starts happening - THE PLAYER OF THE FASTER DECK CAN AND WILL SLOWPLAY.

Just capitalizing the important parts since some folks don't seem to get it.

Then that's stalling, which should come down to the judges. In the situations you described there should be prize penalties issued if not worse.

 

[NoPoke]

Then that's stalling, which should come down to the judges. In the situations you described there should be prize penalties issued if not worse.

Stalling is very difficult to determine. The possibility of slowplay/stalling is not the same as an actual slowplay/stalling. I'll come back to this later.

The penalty guidelines make no mention of players being required to win or lose quickly. Similarly there is no mention anywhere that players are not allowed to win or lose slowly. Assume that players want to win fairly. With fair being defined by the rules, penalty guidelines, and a general appeal to Spirit of the Game. Then what behaviours from players are encouraged by this change?

Strategy at the tables is constrained by and developed from the framework set by the rules. Under some (rather common) circumstances this change alters the losing players optimum strategy from scoop to maximise the game two time to at the very least play it out to minimise the game two time.

So to return to the issue of slow play: this change encourages slow play. Some players will cross the line into actual slow play. Many (should that be most?) will see nothing wrong with adopting a strategy of minimising the game two time: after all that is what the rule change is saying is the correct strategic play. A few will stall, and as intent is very hard to determine will most likely get away with it This change makes it MUCH harder on judges. It makes it harder if only by increasing the number of players that will play out losing games to their fullest extent.

Is a change that encourages players to approach the grey boundary of SLOW PLAY a good one? Well it might be as long as it is fixing a much bigger problem or the problem it encourages is addressed in some other way. ...

 

[Scipio]

NoPoke made my point perfectly clear.
Again, I'll stick to the Kingdra example. Do you have any idea how many actions a Kingdra deck can take in its turn? Several Spray Splashes, Trade Off, several speed trainers, checking the discard pile for the # of energy (vital for Kingdra LA), and you have 15 seconds for each and every single one of your actions. Do you have any notion of how long that is going to take? Not to mention..."Play Collector...shuffle my deck...Communication...shuffle my deck..."

 

[yoyofsho16]

God, it's not STALLING! It's playing a deck that allows your opponent to often get a lead.
The ability of a fast player who lost game 1 scooping game 2 towards the end for a near auto-win is just sickening. This needs to be addressed somehow.

 

[starlighteevee]

Yikes. X3 I hope they change this rule back the way it was. Or at least redo it! SP's take over enough matches but this new rule will only make it much, much worse. Maybe a mid-season HGSS-on rotation wouldn't be so bad after all. =( At least then strategy-players would have a better chance.

 

[Austino]

There's way too much negative and situational assuming going on, IMO.

~Not all Game 1's are going to be long, drawn out battles.
~Not everyone is a stalling, slowplay, anti-SotG player.
~Slowplay WILL be caught at Top Cut considering your matches are being observed. People who hit Top Cut can tell if their opponent is slowplaying, as can a judge, this shouldn't even be an issue being brought up. If your judges can't catch slowplay, talk to the PTO, voice your concern, report bad judging. There's no excuse for a judge to not be able to determine a player's pace of play and whether it's slowplay or not.
~Assuming your opponent is going to "Godhand" Game 3 is ridiculous. It's just as likely in ANY game, not just Game 3, so if they get a great opening hand, then don't get mad that their deck works (they're obviously in Top Cut).
~If you can't take the prizes in your 2 turns allotted (as well as the time given for the game), then why would you deserve to win anyway? At least we're getting an extra 2 turns per player once time is called. No more chatter lock to time then take a prize or roserade GL the one prize for the W.

Instead of whining about the ruling, adapt to it. I personally find it better than:
Judge: "Time!"
Player A: "Yeah, I got you by a prize, man, GG"
Player B: *shows Player A his hand*
Player B: "I had the recovery/Lv. X/DCE/(insert cards) to get you next turn...."

---------- Post added 11/17/2010 at 09:53 AM ----------

Uuuuuugh....

Why. Dont. You. READ.

If I play Kingdra and you a slower deck, I WILL TAKE MY TIME ON MY TURNS. This will result in the game taking so much longer, which causes these situations. That goes for ANY DECK THAT WOULD BE SLOWER THEN MINE. Not just for Steelix. Not just for spread. Not just for Tyranitar. ANYTHING.

Faster decks play better the first 10 minutes. That is a well known fact. After that, slower decks can take over. And once that starts happening - THE PLAYER OF THE FASTER DECK CAN AND WILL SLOWPLAY.

Just capitalizing the important parts since some folks don't seem to get it.

So you're a slowplaying cheater? It's not really your place to accuse players of fast decks of slowplaying. You don't know everyone, so there's no room for you to go around saying Luxchomp, Kingdra, Machamp, Gengar, Sablelock, Donphan, SP-Box, and other players are ALL slowplayers, because those are all fast decks in a fast format.

Get over yourself, please. If someone wants to play a slower deck like steelix, then they take the risk of taking a slow, tank deck into a B2o3 format if they go that far in the tournament considering they only have 30+3 to play in regularly. Decks like that are typically playing from behind anyway, so the player knows their own risk, and you can't hold other players and/or judges accountable for someone's deckchoice.

 

[Scipio]

There's way too much negative and situational assuming going on, IMO.

~Not all Game 1's are going to be long, drawn out battles.
No, but again, the losing player can manipulate the time within the boundaries of the game mechanics - aka by taking their time
~Not everyone is a stalling, slowplay, anti-SotG player.
You dont need to be one to be able to take full advantage of this rule.
~Slowplay WILL be caught at Top Cut considering your matches are being observed. People who hit Top Cut can tell if their opponent is slowplaying, as can a judge, this shouldn't even be an issue being brought up. If your judges can't catch slowplay, talk to the PTO, voice your concern, report bad judging. There's no excuse for a judge to not be able to determine a player's pace of play and whether it's slowplay or not.
Again, if I have 10 actions in a turn, I am allowed to do 150 seconds on them. This is not accounting for any possible shuffles/searches that may take a bit more time. This means turns can take very long. This means it's not called slowplay.
~Assuming your opponent is going to "Godhand" Game 3 is ridiculous. It's just as likely in ANY game, not just Game 3, so if they get a great opening hand, then don't get mad that their deck works (they're obviously in Top Cut).
Tell me. If you play Kingdra and I play Steelix - who is more likely to take the first prize card?
~If you can't take the prizes in your 2 turns allotted (as well as the time given for the game), then why would you deserve to win anyway? At least we're getting an extra 2 turns per player once time is called. No more chatter lock to time then take a prize or roserade GL the one prize for the W.
Uhm, actually...if I just chatterlock you all game long. They then call the +3. I will happily continue the Chatterlock until it gets into a "First prize taken" situation.
More importantly - keep in mind that they too have those extra turns. And SOME decks (COUGH SP COUGH) are a BIT better at taking the cheap prizes then other, slower decks are.

Instead of whining about the ruling, adapt to it. I personally find it better than:
Judge: "Time!"
Player A: "Yeah, I got you by a prize, man, GG"
Player B: *shows Player A his hand*
Player B: "I had the recovery/Lv. X/DCE/(insert cards) to get you next turn...."
Which is why those 3 turns extra are still an amazing bonus to the game. HOWEVER it does not excuse the "Game 2 only needs 1 prize" rule.

Responses in bold, as if that wasn't painfully obvious, but the 17 rule and all...

 

[Austino]

Responses in bold, as if that wasn't painfully obvious, but the 17 rule and all...

Go ahead and keep assuming all you want to defend your point. It really just comes off as player hate. Re-read the added post.

 

[Scipio]

No, I am NOT a slowplayer. I am merely saying that those are options present to those who play that kind of decks. Accuse me of being a cheater while we're at it, are we? Lovely.
Also, I did not ever say anywhere that EVERY player who plays those decks is a slowplayer. You often even won't need to do it on purpose - just play out your turns like you normally would, but instead of scooping after 30 minutes to try and get enough prizes in game 2, you just let play go on until the bitter end.
My most important point is simply this - this new rule nerfs slower decks so much it isn't funny anymore. Under the old rule, a fast deck player on the losing side would scoop early, to make sure he'd have to fight in game 2 to get enough prizes. Now, they can afford to let it drag out for too long, confident in the deck's early game prize taking.

Here is my point. I'd like to see you go against it.

DECKS THAT ARE SLOW BUT POWERFUL ARE ROYALLY SCREWED BY THIS RULE. Try and disprove it, you won't be able to. This new rule shifts the meta even more in favor of decks who can take cheap prizes (Oh hi Garchomp C) or can easily donk a basic (Hello Machamp, fancy seeing you here). Decks that fight from behind have no chance left anymore.

I merely gave examples. You twisted my points.



Also I love how you ignore any valid argument I make in counter to your argument, as well as those made by about 30 other posters, and just simply say "Player hate".