TCG and VG: which is more luck, and which is more strategy?

[Misdreavus]

As we all know, both luck and strategy play major roles in both the Pokémon Trading Card Game and the video games. Luck in the TCG ultimately boils down to "luck of the draw" (which includes opening hands, prizes, and topdecks) and coin flips. The video game "luck list" is a bit more extensive; it includes speed ties, variable damage from attacks, critical hits, inaccurate attacks and evasion (though Double Team and Minimize are banned in most unofficial tourneys), a variable number of turns for the Sleep and Freeze statuses, full Paralysis, and status being induced from attacks like Thunderbolt or abilities like Flame Body. The luck of matchups plays a role in both, but matchups are generally less influential in the video game. Strategy, on the other hand, is less black and white. Both games have a "building" process (decks or teams). Prediction is a key skill in both, although it's more important in the video games since you and your opponent decide your moves simultaneously. Since every match (in either game) is different, both games require you to ultimately make the most of what you and your opponent have at any given point in the match.

It's a tough decision for me, but I'm going to say that the TCG is more luck-based, while the video game is more strategy-based. What do you all think?

 

[Dragonflames1994]

I agree. IMO, In the TCG, all you need is luck, the strategy the deck comes with, and the skill to play it properly. As for building, in the TCG you can just copy a top deck and need no imagination at all. I say "Can" because you can obviously make rogue decks too that are your own. In the Video game, you probably aren't going to be copying anyone's team, but finding your own strategy and pokemon in a unique team. Building a team in video game takes a lot of work hatching for proper IVs and nature, EV training, move planning, etc. But as long as you have the cash, you can BUY a top deck for the TCG.

For example, I like the video game and the TCG, but the video game has such high standards it's too daunting for me at the moment.

Thats just my two cents.

 

[ultimatedra]

I say that the VGC is much more luck based than the TCG. And this is coming from a VG player.

The TCG you get to focus on the here and now. You don't have to worry immediately on what your opponent is going to do. Sure you should be playing ahead of the current turn, but because your opponent cannot stop any of your actions during your turn, you get the time to focus on what is going on.

In the VG you have to think (quickly since you have a 1 minute turn limit) about the speed tiers of the pokemon, and predict what your opponent is going to do THAT turn. Switch-ins, move pools, speed (and stats in general), are all having to be crunched in a very short time and then you guess what your opponent is going to do. What ability do they have? Do you attack to weakness? What if they switch to a resistant pokemon? What if they have X item? What are they going to do to you? Do you switch? Do you set up? WAY to many things to think about prediction wise. Before you even go for any of that you have a ton to think about for team building. Do you go safe with the 100% accuracy moves or do you go for high risk/high return?

Like I said - it comes down to prediction for the VG. You can tweak your deck to counter matchups, but the VG any major tweaking will lead to a non-effective team.

 

[Regis_Neo]

Honestly I'd say they're both about the same really. Don't think I could choose which is more luck based, I know I've been screwed plenty of times by luck in both lol.

 

[bullados]

TCG has more controllable luck. What I mean there is that you can skew the odds of a particular event happening by increasing the number of a certain card or collection of cards in your deck.

VGC has uncontrollable luck. Crits happen. There's an RNG for every attack. Attacks can miss, surprisingly enough.

 

[Regis_Neo]

TCG has more controllable luck. What I mean there is that you can skew the odds of a particular event happening by increasing the number of a certain card or collection of cards in your deck.

VGC has uncontrollable luck. Crits happen. There's an RNG for every attack. Attacks can miss, surprisingly enough.

Theoretically, you can control some those factors of luck to a degree as well, Lucky Chant can negate any chance of crits happening for 5 turns for your team, most people opt for higher accuracy moves and (at least in most Singles rules) evasion modifier clauses are in effect. But otherwise, I do like your description, as VG would tend to have more uncontrollable luck which you cannot influence (like status conditions from some attacks and crits to a degree), while you can more actively shape your destiny in the tcg and avoid some factors of luck like coin flips altogether by not using those cards.

 

[Misdreavus]

I agree. IMO, In the TCG, all you need is luck, the strategy the deck comes with, and the skill to play it properly. As for building, in the TCG you can just copy a top deck and need no imagination at all. I say "Can" because you can obviously make rogue decks too that are your own. In the Video game, you probably aren't going to be copying anyone's team, but finding your own strategy and pokemon in a unique team. Building a team in video game takes a lot of work hatching for proper IVs and nature, EV training, move planning, etc. But as long as you have the cash, you can BUY a top deck for the TCG.

For example, I like the video game and the TCG, but the video game has such high standards it's too daunting for me at the moment.

Thats just my two cents.

IMO, that really depends on the deck and your definition of strategy. If you consider strategy to be the basic premise of a deck, then Dialgachomp (a better example than anything in this format) does come with its strategy (keep Dialga G LV.X alive), but there's much more to the deck than that (such as knowing when to break the Deafen lock).

I say that the VGC is much more luck based than the TCG. And this is coming from a VG player.

The TCG you get to focus on the here and now. You don't have to worry immediately on what your opponent is going to do. Sure you should be playing ahead of the current turn, but because your opponent cannot stop any of your actions during your turn, you get the time to focus on what is going on.

In the VG you have to think (quickly since you have a 1 minute turn limit) about the speed tiers of the pokemon, and predict what your opponent is going to do THAT turn. Switch-ins, move pools, speed (and stats in general), are all having to be crunched in a very short time and then you guess what your opponent is going to do. What ability do they have? Do you attack to weakness? What if they switch to a resistant pokemon? What if they have X item? What are they going to do to you? Do you switch? Do you set up? WAY to many things to think about prediction wise. Before you even go for any of that you have a ton to think about for team building. Do you go safe with the 100% accuracy moves or do you go for high risk/high return?

Like I said - it comes down to prediction for the VG. You can tweak your deck to counter matchups, but the VG any major tweaking will lead to a non-effective team.

I agree that prediction is key, but I've always considered it to be more of a skill than luck. If you're knowledgeable about the metagame and have practiced enough, you're able to make decisions in regards to things like Speed stats and possible switch-ins (especially with team preview on like it is in the VGC) much more easily. I'd say the "luck" aspect of prediction would lie in overpredicting vs. underpredicting.

TCG has more controllable luck. What I mean there is that you can skew the odds of a particular event happening by increasing the number of a certain card or collection of cards in your deck.

VGC has uncontrollable luck. Crits happen. There's an RNG for every attack. Attacks can miss, surprisingly enough.

In many ways, that's exactly the case. One big uncontrollable in the TCG though is your start, while in the video games, your start is entirely up to you. A good deck has enough ways of getting the ideal cards at the start of the game, but you still can't guarantee that you'll be able to get what you want. In either case, your opponent can do things to disrupt your start, which in TCG can often come down to the uncontrollable luck that is the opening coin flip.

Theoretically, you can control some those factors of luck to a degree as well, Lucky Chant can negate any chance of crits happening for 5 turns for your team, most people opt for higher accuracy moves and (at least in most Singles rules) evasion modifier clauses are in effect. But otherwise, I do like your description, as VG would tend to have more uncontrollable luck which you cannot influence (like status conditions from some attacks and crits to a degree), while you can more actively shape your destiny in the tcg and avoid some factors of luck like coin flips altogether by not using those cards.

True, but due to the unpredictability of critical hits, Lucky Chant isn't a very viable move. This format isn't as flip-heavy as some of the past ones (i.e. Neo with babies, Focus Band, Slowking, and more), but there's always going to be at least one coin flip you can't avoid (determining who goes first). Aside from that, most setup decks play Cleffa, Durant's Crushing Hammer flips can be huge, and there's always the random stuff like Tynamo's Thunder Wave.

 

[Benzo]

I believe that both have an equal amount of luck-based implements in the game.
Being a player of both the games, I look at luck as the "bonus meterial" that keeps the games from being to redundent or repatitious let alone predictable to 100%.

All games have some luck factor, or it would not be a game that would stick around long enough to enjoy or stay interested in long enough. But that is just me- and, taking some risks and the risk's paying off is luck bringing pleasure to the adrenaline bin.

 

[Porii Sames]

TCG is basically all luck but it's much harder to roll with the punches and imo is much, much harder than vg. And I play vg pretty well. Vg needs some skill but otherwise its just adapting to the hax at hand and playing simple mindgames.

 

[FirestormXVI]

I say that the VGC is much more luck based than the TCG. And this is coming from a VG player.

The TCG you get to focus on the here and now. You don't have to worry immediately on what your opponent is going to do. Sure you should be playing ahead of the current turn, but because your opponent cannot stop any of your actions during your turn, you get the time to focus on what is going on.

In the VG you have to think (quickly since you have a 1 minute turn limit) about the speed tiers of the pokemon, and predict what your opponent is going to do THAT turn. Switch-ins, move pools, speed (and stats in general), are all having to be crunched in a very short time and then you guess what your opponent is going to do. What ability do they have? Do you attack to weakness? What if they switch to a resistant pokemon? What if they have X item? What are they going to do to you? Do you switch? Do you set up? WAY to many things to think about prediction wise. Before you even go for any of that you have a ton to think about for team building. Do you go safe with the 100% accuracy moves or do you go for high risk/high return?

Like I said - it comes down to prediction for the VG. You can tweak your deck to counter matchups, but the VG any major tweaking will lead to a non-effective team.

None of what you listed can be considered luck. That's just being able to apply knowledge quickly - a key skill in every competitive video game.

I feel that luck and matchups affect the TCG moreso than the video game. A bad hand first turn can cost you the entire game and in many cases that's the tournament. A critical hit in the game can often cost you the game, but not to the same extent. Both are pretty luck based, but hey, that's Pokemon!

 

[z-man]

TCG has more luck. Card draws and prize draws happen every turn. Did the PONT give me what I want? Did I draw the right prize card? Luck is a bigger percentage of the game than in VGC.

In VGC, the only luck is critical hits. It matters more than luck in TCG because crits can change the flow of the game severely. In TCG, we play the hands that we are dealt. Card draws can change the flow of the game, but they rarely do. In VGC, a crit can change a losing match to a very winnable match. Even then, you can control TCG's luck by building a good deck. Having 4 of a card you want to start with makes a big difference. You choose your fate and how much you chance the game to luck. With VGC, you can't do anything about luck.

 

[bullados]

VGC also has damage RNGs that can be the difference b/w a 2HKO and a 3HKO.

 

[TheRolesWePlay]

I don't really think that it's fair to determine which is luckier in nature as luck has very different roles in both of them.

Luck in the VGC has more of a random element to them in the fact that you can crit, miss, or just do a little less damage than necessary due to the RNG. Further then there's the whole aspect of your opponent's team being more of a mystery, and having more uncertainties than the TCG.

Meanwhile luck is more prominent in early phases of the game, what's in your prizes, top decks, and the occasional coin flip here and there. If you have KO you can't be caught off guard by the spiteful RNG resulting in a miss, and if you use attacks that could potentially fail due to coin flips, then you already know your chances. As the game continues you filter out cards in your deck widdling down you resources, but also narrowing down the possibilities, and being able to predict your top deck with more accuracy.

VGC is a constant underplayed luck, while TCG is more in your face, and can be counteracted easier.

 

[TheDarkTwins]

It's got to be the VG.

As previously stated, TCG has controllable luck. You can skew the odds in your favor, and anyone who says you can't, is playing the game wrongly. There is a reason why some players do better, or seem to "top deck" everything. It's because they have skewed the odds in their favor by playing other cards. There is a bit of uncontrollable luck (like starts), but overall it's less luck based.

I also have to say the biggest reason I feel that way is you usually see the same players making Worlds in the TCG, however the VCG doesn't have that same consistency because it truly is that much harder because of the luck based element in it.

Drew

 

[vaporeon]

I'd like to say the VG has more luck in it based on the RNG. Like people have said with damage, crits and other 'random' things. In one game, I only had one 'safe' switch I could make and then my Pidgeot had her day ruined when she took a critical Leaf Storm. As for the TCG, the luck only goes as far as the opening hand really. If you get your collector and can setup, you do well. In the VG, again, different teams do different things and most come into play setup.

I guess it's hard to compare the to.

 

[Cyrus]

Before you guys go too nuts, keep in mind a couple things...

*It is a logical fallacy to make the claim that one game is more luck-based than another simply because you do better in one over the other. For example, I do way better in checkers than I do in chess when up against the same opponents, but does that make chess a more luck-based game? Maybe we're all just mediocre at chess!

*The TCG and VG are fundamentally different games. Despite the fact that they come from the same franchise, they're not even classified under the same family of games: the TCG is almost purely sequential, whereas the VG is simultaneous. One could argue that the Pokemon TCG has more in common with baseball than it does with its Nintendo DS counterpart!



That said, the Pokemon TCG is easily one of the most strategically-demanding sequential games I have ever played. In one turn alone, you can anywhere from hundreds to thousands of possible sets of actions - something that really allows for true skill to shine through. Of course, practice and metagame familiarity begin to clamp down on this a bit, but the diversity in play execution, deck building, etc is amazing.

Can I say the same about the video game? No, but then again, my skillset at the video game just scratches the surface of what it means to be "good," so it would be an unfair assessment to make. Plus, it's a simultaneous game where both players are making decisions at the same time!