Pokemon Catcher the card that is played four of in almost any top teir deck minus a few here or there. I was wondering was Pokemon Catcher good or bad for the game? You could say good for the fact of it stops over powered bench sitters, though it also makes it to where the only thing you can do is run four and hope you can stop you opponent from setting up anything. What are your thoughts on Pokemon Catcher was it good or bad for the game?
Was Catcher good or bad for the game?
- Thread starter ESAKO
- Start date
It's a combination of things...
At first, I think Catcher was really bad. Now, with big EX's being introduced it's about the only way to stop them or consistently 2 hit them. I think it was harsh for stage 2 decks in addition to the new rare candy ruling because you're almost forced to play 4 of a stage 2's basic to ensure you end your first turn with 2 benched (otherwise your opponent will catcher the lone one and you will never set up). 1-1 lines are non existent, except for Roserade's briefly. Even 2-2 lines save Ninetales. Decks playing things like Garbodor must play 3 basics to get two benched consistently at the same time. I also think Sableye can really abuse it, in addition to Hypnotoxic.
Right now I think the biggest offender in the format is Virbank + Hypnotoxic.
At first, I think Catcher was really bad. Now, with big EX's being introduced it's about the only way to stop them or consistently 2 hit them. I think it was harsh for stage 2 decks in addition to the new rare candy ruling because you're almost forced to play 4 of a stage 2's basic to ensure you end your first turn with 2 benched (otherwise your opponent will catcher the lone one and you will never set up). 1-1 lines are non existent, except for Roserade's briefly. Even 2-2 lines save Ninetales. Decks playing things like Garbodor must play 3 basics to get two benched consistently at the same time. I also think Sableye can really abuse it, in addition to Hypnotoxic.
Right now I think the biggest offender in the format is Virbank + Hypnotoxic.
Like everyone else was saying, Catcher was bad when first released, but now it's not the main problem. Right now it's the power creep (EXs). When you can have something hitting T2 for 100+ damage you know it's not good. Catcher is the only thing that can balance out EXs because you can just Catcher up a damaged one to knock it out.
There have been some interesting setup decks that rely on benched supporting Pokemon that have never been playable because of catcher. Catcher reduces the diversity of the game, and in that sense it is bad for the game. In the Stormfront era, it was a legit strategy to put up a Pokemon as a sacrifice for a few turns while you set up behind the lines. To the extent that this is reasonable and consistent with other forms of team combat, it is no longer possible as well and that seems odd.
thepliskin5005
New Member
Well cards like plasma klang would never be knocked out so yea it is a good thing.
Tim17
<a href="http://pokegym.net/forums/showpost.php?p=
fixed in quote.
that aside. I agree with what most of pointed out, initially it wasn't a good idea for the game. Now it's both a blessing and a curse. It's necessary to use to take out the big threats or work around them if possible, however it's also used against you in a similar way (depending on what you and the opponent are playing).
The power creep in the game along with poor design on several cards (hi Sableye, you and your dark required item grabbing attack).
I will say that they are somewhat changing pace and it seems like we might have some hope coming back with the latest set and upcoming set(s)....
Otaku
Active Member
I am going to have to risk annoying (and maybe confusing) people by giving a different opinion... but one that half agrees with what has been said.
Pokémon Catcher is, in and of itself, not a problem. First, understand that while it may be incredibly difficult for specific cards, the card pool of the game (and in some cases, changes to the core rules) can "break" any card, but also leave it as binder-fodder. Ace Spec cards have made this easy to demonstrate with actual cards; the "bad" Ace Spec cards would be at least "good" as regular Items. Some older cards that were bad have become great and that were great have become bad based simply on the shifting card pools.
So what about Pokémon Catcher? Look at what it does; it forces something on the Bench into the Active slot. Why is this so important? The Bench is meant to be a "safe" place (but not too safe) and Pokémon Catcher is one of the universal methods of breaching the safety. However complaints about it usually missed two aspects:
1) Pokémon Reversal was already by and large a staple (and at a three or four count)
2) Both Pokémon Reversal and Pokémon Catcher are only as good as what they have backing them.
Pokémon Reversal gave the illusion of a safe Bench, but from what I saw of tournament results, the winners (while thankfully usually still top players) were also the ones getting those Pokémon Reversal flips. More recently, we saw similar (but less pronounced) results with Crushing Hammer and now Hypnotoxic Laser flips. Skillful play can keep you from losing if your deck was well built... but not if your opponent is not only also playing well with a good list but also succeeding in their own flips.
When you succeed or fail the flips can matter as well; maybe you flipped mostly "tails", but every time the game was riding on the result you still got "heads". Pokémon Catcher removed this "illusion" of safety that slower decks had, and remember, Pokémon Reversal co-existed with a wider variety of useful Supporters as well as Junk Arm; it was not uncommon for someone to spam it until it worked in a single turn.
Now, take away the speed of the format, and Pokémon Catcher honestly seems like a decent return; it appears overpowered because the format is far, far too fast early game and HP scores are just so low and hard to work with from a design standpoint. Remember, TCG HP and damage are always in units of 10, so for printed HP scores designers are really working with 3 to 20 HP, and when customizing attacks it becomes harder and harder to balance Energy versus damage and effects; a minor effect that isn't worth a full 10 points of damage is a bit of a design dilemma.
Players understandably don't like how "cheap" (by which I mean unfair; Pokémon Catcher being pricey is a separate complaint!) it is to win because even if your opponent does eventually set-up, a very simple, almost primitive aggressive deck (as opposed to the complex ones that require fine skill to build and run) can build a huge lead before hand.
If we didn't have this early game speed, you would almost want your opponent to waste cards and attacks bringing up a Bench-sitter because it wouldn't result in a OHKO... and you just drop a Switch on the next turn as a counter, bringing up whatever you had Active before. To finish the job, your opponent needs another Pokémon Catcher, and your Active is already going to last a turn extra. Toss in Max Potion (for Bench-sitters with little or no Energy one them), and the Bench would be appropriately safe if decks weren't so easily scoring OHKOs and pseudo-OHKOs.
So Pokémon Catcher, as hard to believe as it may seem, actually was a good card to release given several other decisions I think were simply bad. Besides replacing the flippy Pokémon Reversal, this format actually has some pretty sick Bench sitters and (perhaps as a surprise to some), a lot of top decks wouldn't be that different; the cards run aside from Pokémon Catcher are just that powerful. A few specific decks would fall, maybe a handful would rise up, but the top decks would likely remain untouched.
tl;dr: Pokémon Catcher was actually good for the game because it replaced a flippy alternative that just made people think there was more freedom in deck choice, while the top tables usually disagreed. Even the concerns it does raise aren't from its own inherent power, but from the speed/power of the first few turns where inexpensive attacks can easily steamroll even other fast decks, let alone slow ones.
Pokémon Catcher is, in and of itself, not a problem. First, understand that while it may be incredibly difficult for specific cards, the card pool of the game (and in some cases, changes to the core rules) can "break" any card, but also leave it as binder-fodder. Ace Spec cards have made this easy to demonstrate with actual cards; the "bad" Ace Spec cards would be at least "good" as regular Items. Some older cards that were bad have become great and that were great have become bad based simply on the shifting card pools.
So what about Pokémon Catcher? Look at what it does; it forces something on the Bench into the Active slot. Why is this so important? The Bench is meant to be a "safe" place (but not too safe) and Pokémon Catcher is one of the universal methods of breaching the safety. However complaints about it usually missed two aspects:
1) Pokémon Reversal was already by and large a staple (and at a three or four count)
2) Both Pokémon Reversal and Pokémon Catcher are only as good as what they have backing them.
Pokémon Reversal gave the illusion of a safe Bench, but from what I saw of tournament results, the winners (while thankfully usually still top players) were also the ones getting those Pokémon Reversal flips. More recently, we saw similar (but less pronounced) results with Crushing Hammer and now Hypnotoxic Laser flips. Skillful play can keep you from losing if your deck was well built... but not if your opponent is not only also playing well with a good list but also succeeding in their own flips.
When you succeed or fail the flips can matter as well; maybe you flipped mostly "tails", but every time the game was riding on the result you still got "heads". Pokémon Catcher removed this "illusion" of safety that slower decks had, and remember, Pokémon Reversal co-existed with a wider variety of useful Supporters as well as Junk Arm; it was not uncommon for someone to spam it until it worked in a single turn.
Now, take away the speed of the format, and Pokémon Catcher honestly seems like a decent return; it appears overpowered because the format is far, far too fast early game and HP scores are just so low and hard to work with from a design standpoint. Remember, TCG HP and damage are always in units of 10, so for printed HP scores designers are really working with 3 to 20 HP, and when customizing attacks it becomes harder and harder to balance Energy versus damage and effects; a minor effect that isn't worth a full 10 points of damage is a bit of a design dilemma.
Players understandably don't like how "cheap" (by which I mean unfair; Pokémon Catcher being pricey is a separate complaint!) it is to win because even if your opponent does eventually set-up, a very simple, almost primitive aggressive deck (as opposed to the complex ones that require fine skill to build and run) can build a huge lead before hand.
If we didn't have this early game speed, you would almost want your opponent to waste cards and attacks bringing up a Bench-sitter because it wouldn't result in a OHKO... and you just drop a Switch on the next turn as a counter, bringing up whatever you had Active before. To finish the job, your opponent needs another Pokémon Catcher, and your Active is already going to last a turn extra. Toss in Max Potion (for Bench-sitters with little or no Energy one them), and the Bench would be appropriately safe if decks weren't so easily scoring OHKOs and pseudo-OHKOs.
So Pokémon Catcher, as hard to believe as it may seem, actually was a good card to release given several other decisions I think were simply bad. Besides replacing the flippy Pokémon Reversal, this format actually has some pretty sick Bench sitters and (perhaps as a surprise to some), a lot of top decks wouldn't be that different; the cards run aside from Pokémon Catcher are just that powerful. A few specific decks would fall, maybe a handful would rise up, but the top decks would likely remain untouched.
tl;dr: Pokémon Catcher was actually good for the game because it replaced a flippy alternative that just made people think there was more freedom in deck choice, while the top tables usually disagreed. Even the concerns it does raise aren't from its own inherent power, but from the speed/power of the first few turns where inexpensive attacks can easily steamroll even other fast decks, let alone slow ones.
HoLoN_TrAiNeR
New Member
While the impact this card makes in the game is immense, I believe that it is one of the few cards that takes some knowledge to play.
You're always there looking at your opponent's discard pile looking for how many catchers they have used, it one of the resources that you have to manage well during a game, sometimes it's obvious when you should play it, sometimes it isn't...
You're always there looking at your opponent's discard pile looking for how many catchers they have used, it one of the resources that you have to manage well during a game, sometimes it's obvious when you should play it, sometimes it isn't...
The card that actually allows players to comeback in games where they are down is bad? In my opinion N adds considerable more skill to the game than Catcher does.
N=Good
Catcher=Bad
dialga master
Member
Catcher>Reversal
Format with catcher or reversal<format without catcher or reversal
Format with catcher or reversal<format without catcher or reversal
Otaku
Active Member
How does it allow them to come back? Does it due it through skillful application or through a relatively simple application?
Using N well can require skill... but it is usually pretty obvious. Would you really consider it "skill" if you were stomping me despite ol' Otaku having deck/Type advantage... okay, that shouldn't surprise you at all. :lol: Kidding aside - wait, was this an April Fool's Day post? - is it good that you are winning a game between the two of us until I dropped N while you were winning one Prize to six?
Is it really a good thing when my shuffle and draw for six keeps me flush with resources while your shuffle and draw for one destroys all your plans and in-hand set-up that should have won you the game next turn? When my abundant hand and Type/deck advantage allow me to take down your main attacking Pokémon and the tempo shift on top of it all gives you no legitimate chance unless you top deck a Supporter immediately the next turn to win?
Okay, that was cherry picked... lose the type/deck advantage. Is it really fair that just because you didn't have a completely unavoidable win without the cards in your hand, that playing N at that point and winning off of it would be a deserved comeback? Drawing dead three times isn't that much as even some otherwise great cards can easily be dead; Virbank City Gym, Hypnotoxic Laser, Ultra Ball, Pokémon Catcher... when I can easily switch out of things (not a surprise, this format) and what you really need is an Energy or a Supporter.
I've discussed "come back" cards before, and it boils down to two questions:
1) Why do you need a comeback card?
2) Why do you deserve a comeback card?
The answer to the first usually exposes a flaw in the game, and that flaw is the real problem. The latter usually exposes the flaw of comeback cards in general; even when there is a need for them, how do you tailor them to only apply when that comeback is deserved.
I do not know which card adds more skill to the game, but despite the fact that you are a far superior player to myself, I need much more of an argument for you to convince me that Pokémon Catcher is actually "bad" for the game in and of itself or even under the current circumstances. At best, as far as I can deduce it was a "suboptimal" move.
thepokemonnetwork100
Member
simple
would u rather lose cause a card just does what it does
or
would you rather lose cause they hit heads? (pokemon reversal)
imo id rather the game have as little luck involved as possible
would u rather lose cause a card just does what it does
or
would you rather lose cause they hit heads? (pokemon reversal)
imo id rather the game have as little luck involved as possible
A cool dude
New Member
I honestly hate this card.....It is pricey, it is so annoying, and i think this format can do without it. Also it doesn't help that for some reason, in this format there is not many usable cards. Cards in this format are either amazing, good, or just awful. So no, i do not think this card is good for this format
I'd rather have Reversal personally as it would force players to deal with a situation if they got tails instead of letting players go all in safely with Catcher
Sure N has some luck, but the best players prepare for N and to some degree can play around it.
Vegeta ss4
Iron Chef Leader
N is NOT a big deal as Jay said. You can better your posistion against N with correct plays. It is really simple, get rid of uneeded cards in your deck and hand.
N adds luck to late game. If someone plays an N and both players are given bad hands, it just makes it so whoever topdecks first wins. This is complete luck (assuming both players thinned their decks out, though what cards one is able to thin is partial luck as well).