vegitalian
New Member
Cradily LA...
Back in the day, Claydol was mighty tasty :tongue:
Back in the day, Claydol was mighty tasty :tongue:
What do you believe is themost under rated card in TCG history?
- Thread starter jigglejuice
- Start date
Magic_Umbreon
Researching Tower Scientist, Retired
Ah I see on this article. I'm surprised to see it in a deck with only 3 DCE and 22 total energy, but very interesting Base/Jungle only build.
Keith William's Gloom article illustrates the potential of an underrated stage 1 for the Base/Jungle metagame. Not that anyone would play that [metagame] now, but it's worth a mention.
Last edited:
Otaku
Active Member
Not so funny when you remember that (GGGG) bought 60 on a Stage 2 with a good (but not great) Pokemon Power (specifically Base Set Venusaur) and for example Gyarados had 100 HP, enjoyed Grass Weakness over Lightning, and was "good" in spite of coming from Magikarp because it had a (WWW) for 50 attack and Fighting Resistance on top of said 100 HP.
You seemed to get less damage for Energy back then: the cards that follow more modern pricing schemes were the best in the game back then. At the same time it was odd since we had lower average HP scores and thus hitting for 60 would 2HKO anything while now it requires hitting for 80 to 2HKO anything legal.
A lot of the overpricing in attacks I believe came from over valuing certain effects and missing combos. After a while TPC seemed to realize a lot of Special Conditions were worth the equivalent of 10 points of damage if automatic and five in on a flip (or similar restricted effect) with some obvious exceptions like Paralysis auto-Paralysis being far more valuable and Sleep always being worth less since it had a 50% chance of curing itself before it would matter (at least if inflicted as part of an attack). So while automatic Paralysis has shown up the cost has been very great (usually some condition to keep you from spamming it turn after turn) while for a while Sleep was added with no Energy cost (I mean literally a zero Energy attack in some cases) because it was so weak without getting that "leg-up".
During pretty much the first half of the game, you'd see Special Conditions priced for an entire Colored Energy Requirement and often with a flip! Similar cases of unbalance was that Pokemon all seemed to get the same (or at least similar) damage for Energy... ignoring the kinds of bonuses later granted to Basics that don't Evolve at all, Stage 1 Pokemon that don't Evolve, and to Stage 2 Pokemon in general. Or at least the bonuses were applied differently.
Oh, getting way off topic, so did anyone mention Mr. Fuji yet? It is hard to argue it was a good card because all the decks that should have played it just couldn't make room and/or the onslaught of Energy Removal and Gust of Wind made it too hard to implement, and sometimes it was too hard to set whatever you got back up again (like for Evolutions).
You seemed to get less damage for Energy back then: the cards that follow more modern pricing schemes were the best in the game back then. At the same time it was odd since we had lower average HP scores and thus hitting for 60 would 2HKO anything while now it requires hitting for 80 to 2HKO anything legal.
A lot of the overpricing in attacks I believe came from over valuing certain effects and missing combos. After a while TPC seemed to realize a lot of Special Conditions were worth the equivalent of 10 points of damage if automatic and five in on a flip (or similar restricted effect) with some obvious exceptions like Paralysis auto-Paralysis being far more valuable and Sleep always being worth less since it had a 50% chance of curing itself before it would matter (at least if inflicted as part of an attack). So while automatic Paralysis has shown up the cost has been very great (usually some condition to keep you from spamming it turn after turn) while for a while Sleep was added with no Energy cost (I mean literally a zero Energy attack in some cases) because it was so weak without getting that "leg-up".
During pretty much the first half of the game, you'd see Special Conditions priced for an entire Colored Energy Requirement and often with a flip! Similar cases of unbalance was that Pokemon all seemed to get the same (or at least similar) damage for Energy... ignoring the kinds of bonuses later granted to Basics that don't Evolve at all, Stage 1 Pokemon that don't Evolve, and to Stage 2 Pokemon in general. Or at least the bonuses were applied differently.
Oh, getting way off topic, so did anyone mention Mr. Fuji yet? It is hard to argue it was a good card because all the decks that should have played it just couldn't make room and/or the onslaught of Energy Removal and Gust of Wind made it too hard to implement, and sometimes it was too hard to set whatever you got back up again (like for Evolutions).
Otaku
Active Member
Articjedi: I did remember that. I actually have a few sentences about that in my mini-article of a post. 
I will remind you that damage from attacks basically stayed flat Base Set through Gym Challenge, then started slowly rising with the Neo sets. Its all been adjusting, but I can't really call it proportional. Even ignoring the "overkill" cards like Zekrom, look at the "other" Emboar: (RRCC) with two R Energy discarded buys 150 points of damage, and its got a competent back up attack so that even if the other Emboar didn't exist, it could still attack each turn. Compare that with Base Set Chairzard: its Pokemon Power (later Poke-Body) meant that it basically did 100 for (CCCC) with two Energy cards discarded, and that was it. So while you did 100 one turn, you then needed two turns to "reload".
So again, I realize there has been power creep, but even adjusting for that things are as a whole better designed now... or at least they were about two years ago. Things have been rather odd with the last few sets, making it very, very hard to evaluate cards. >_<
I will remind you that damage from attacks basically stayed flat Base Set through Gym Challenge, then started slowly rising with the Neo sets. Its all been adjusting, but I can't really call it proportional. Even ignoring the "overkill" cards like Zekrom, look at the "other" Emboar: (RRCC) with two R Energy discarded buys 150 points of damage, and its got a competent back up attack so that even if the other Emboar didn't exist, it could still attack each turn. Compare that with Base Set Chairzard: its Pokemon Power (later Poke-Body) meant that it basically did 100 for (CCCC) with two Energy cards discarded, and that was it. So while you did 100 one turn, you then needed two turns to "reload".So again, I realize there has been power creep, but even adjusting for that things are as a whole better designed now... or at least they were about two years ago. Things have been rather odd with the last few sets, making it very, very hard to evaluate cards. >_<
Articjedi
Active Member
Articjedi: I did remember that. I actually have a few sentences about that in my mini-article of a post.
So again, I realize there has been power creep, but even adjusting for that things are as a whole better designed now... or at least they were about two years ago. Things have been rather odd with the last few sets, making it very, very hard to evaluate cards. >_<
Didn't read that part, sorry:biggrin:.
There have been overkill cards several times in plenty of formats. True, if we compare them to base set it was rare to get a really good overkill pokemon, but less than recent formats always had a ohko component. Now, you either take a huge risk of drawing exactly the right cards with zekrom, or you need a stage 2 and probably a couple pluspowers with reshiram. Cheaper attackers like donphan and yanmega need at least two hits to get a ko, one on basics. Not much different than lbs dealing 200 a turn, or gallade flipping all their prizes, or latias* dealing 150 to any stage 2. I wouldn't call it proprtional to the times when pokemon first came out, and even when neo came out the attacks were only disproptionally good because of oversight, but it is definitely in line with the attacks under the nintendo era and probably the expedition block right before. I guess what we really have are crappy attacks through expedition then we the power level has climbed up, as most of the ohko attacks pre-d/p were limited to ex pokemon.
Otaku
Active Member
Um... being limited to a "special class" of Pokemon counts as part of a cost.
For a while, the pricing scheme went:
(C) = 10 points of damage
(X) = 15 points of damage
Where (C) is a single colorless energy requirement and (X) is a single, specific colored Energy requirement.
Then numerous other factors applied. For example, you could "wager" the damage on a coin toss when designing an attack. This is exactly what happened when you'd see attacks like:
Discards should be treated as if the amount discarded was part of the initial Energy requirement. This is because it was rare for Pokemon to last more than a turn or two Active, so unless you were able to thoroughly dominate with it, you'd usually be doing good to attack twice with the discarded Energy.
Adding an actual effect (like a Special Condition) "costs" Points of damage. For example Poison was worth 10 points of damage, or five on a flip or similar "works half the time" restriction. So since Poison-Type Pokemon used to be Grass-Types, seeing something like
Attacks sometimes "borrow" from each other; that is a poor attack is balanced out by a better one. In practice this can fail spectacularly as a single good attack might break a card beyond what a single unimpressive attack can balance out. More successful is using poor stats to balance things out.
There are a few more things to consider, but I am running out of time so I'll add the most important: what the Pokemon is! What I gave was the baseline for a Pokemon that can still Evolve twice, e.g. a Basic Pokemon that Evolves all the way into a Stage 2. To be competitive, Basic Pokemon that don't Evolve deserve a small bonus. Looking at the Base Set, I don't know if this was understood then, but it became better and better understood and the e-card and EX sets tended to understand it.
A basic that Evolves only once gets a small bonus... its options are more limited! A Stage 1 that is fully Evolved needs to be a little better than a non-Evolving Basic, or else there is no point in playing them over Basic Pokemon. Stage 1 Pokemon that can Evolve still should be a little better than Evolving basic Pokemon (rewarding the effort of getting them into play) but not upstage non-Evolving Stage 1 Pokemon. Stage 2 Pokemon are the hardest to get into play, and thus need to be the most powerful. Lastly Pokemon with other restrictions or benefits vary. If a sub-group is well supported, they should actually be less useful than a non-affiliated equivalent: their power comes from using them as a team, not splashing them randomly into a deck. Pokemon with other special effects or classes also alter the final cost: Pokemon-ex were worth two Prizes, but took less space and resource than running two equivalent Pokemon. So they shouldn't be twice as good as a normal version, but they did deserve significant stat and effect bonuses.
For a while, the pricing scheme went:
(C) = 10 points of damage
(X) = 15 points of damage
Where (C) is a single colorless energy requirement and (X) is a single, specific colored Energy requirement.
Then numerous other factors applied. For example, you could "wager" the damage on a coin toss when designing an attack. This is exactly what happened when you'd see attacks like:
Discards should be treated as if the amount discarded was part of the initial Energy requirement. This is because it was rare for Pokemon to last more than a turn or two Active, so unless you were able to thoroughly dominate with it, you'd usually be doing good to attack twice with the discarded Energy.
Adding an actual effect (like a Special Condition) "costs" Points of damage. For example Poison was worth 10 points of damage, or five on a flip or similar "works half the time" restriction. So since Poison-Type Pokemon used to be Grass-Types, seeing something like
Attacks sometimes "borrow" from each other; that is a poor attack is balanced out by a better one. In practice this can fail spectacularly as a single good attack might break a card beyond what a single unimpressive attack can balance out. More successful is using poor stats to balance things out.
There are a few more things to consider, but I am running out of time so I'll add the most important: what the Pokemon is! What I gave was the baseline for a Pokemon that can still Evolve twice, e.g. a Basic Pokemon that Evolves all the way into a Stage 2. To be competitive, Basic Pokemon that don't Evolve deserve a small bonus. Looking at the Base Set, I don't know if this was understood then, but it became better and better understood and the e-card and EX sets tended to understand it.
A basic that Evolves only once gets a small bonus... its options are more limited! A Stage 1 that is fully Evolved needs to be a little better than a non-Evolving Basic, or else there is no point in playing them over Basic Pokemon. Stage 1 Pokemon that can Evolve still should be a little better than Evolving basic Pokemon (rewarding the effort of getting them into play) but not upstage non-Evolving Stage 1 Pokemon. Stage 2 Pokemon are the hardest to get into play, and thus need to be the most powerful. Lastly Pokemon with other restrictions or benefits vary. If a sub-group is well supported, they should actually be less useful than a non-affiliated equivalent: their power comes from using them as a team, not splashing them randomly into a deck. Pokemon with other special effects or classes also alter the final cost: Pokemon-ex were worth two Prizes, but took less space and resource than running two equivalent Pokemon. So they shouldn't be twice as good as a normal version, but they did deserve significant stat and effect bonuses.
http://pokegym.net/gallery/showimage.php?i=45530&c=205
Wiped the floor with luxchomp <3
This card won me nationals <3
Also Torterra X, GoW every turn? All the torterras were bad and so no one remembered it, I remember looking it up after looking at the UL Toerterra and I was like "WHAT?!"
Wiped the floor with luxchomp <3
This card won me nationals <3
Also Torterra X, GoW every turn? All the torterras were bad and so no one remembered it, I remember looking it up after looking at the UL Toerterra and I was like "WHAT?!"
Last edited by a moderator:
Pidgeotto Trainer
New Member
Some underused cards I played that I think should've been much more popular:
Kabutops NR, Slaking RS, Meganium ex, Sceptile ex d, Alakazam MT, Reuniclus for 2 months lol. Pidgeot d was a card I couldn't get to work, but I feel like should've been great. Swoop! Teleporter was played, but I think people forget how good it was. It just opened up so many possibilities. You could make an argument for many cards in every format.
Kabutops NR, Slaking RS, Meganium ex, Sceptile ex d, Alakazam MT, Reuniclus for 2 months lol. Pidgeot d was a card I couldn't get to work, but I feel like should've been great. Swoop! Teleporter was played, but I think people forget how good it was. It just opened up so many possibilities. You could make an argument for many cards in every format.
homeofmew
Active Member
Last edited by a moderator:
smacktack15
New Member
But Nidoqueen had a way better body :thumb:
~Blazi-King~
Active Member
Weezing (DX) combo'd w/ Victreebel...Definitely made 2 underrated cards a formidible deck...netted me the '05LCQ Invite, and top 64 at World's '05
Otaku
Active Member
While recognized as a combo, yeah so many players seemed to dismiss the good ol' Liability decks because they don't understand how Prize count =/= winner unless someone is at zero or time is called.
Oh, no time to link to it, but how about Zapdos from the Game Boy game? The "Legendary Card". It had 100 HP, no Weakness, Fighting -30 Resistance, two Retreat Cost, and a sweet Pokemon Power and attack. When played from hand, computer randomly selects one other (so no itself) Pokemon and does 30 points of damage to it. The attack required (LLL) but hit for 70 points of damage, again to a randomly selected Pokemon other than Zapdos. I've had two great builds with it, both by controlling my Bench and/or playing Pokemon that could use the damage (e.g. Rage/Rampage types). Spamming it can be great fun. The only downside is that the original Base Set Electrode isn't in the game!
Note: When I first typed this post I mistakenly typed "Electabuzz" instead of "Electrode". Big difference.
Oh, no time to link to it, but how about Zapdos from the Game Boy game? The "Legendary Card". It had 100 HP, no Weakness, Fighting -30 Resistance, two Retreat Cost, and a sweet Pokemon Power and attack. When played from hand, computer randomly selects one other (so no itself) Pokemon and does 30 points of damage to it. The attack required (LLL) but hit for 70 points of damage, again to a randomly selected Pokemon other than Zapdos. I've had two great builds with it, both by controlling my Bench and/or playing Pokemon that could use the damage (e.g. Rage/Rampage types). Spamming it can be great fun. The only downside is that the original Base Set Electrode isn't in the game!
Note: When I first typed this post I mistakenly typed "Electabuzz" instead of "Electrode". Big difference.
Last edited:
Articjedi
Active Member
It was in the game. I built haymaker decks all the time for that game and had it in nearly everything.
Magic_Umbreon
Researching Tower Scientist, Retired
And Zapdos is well-known as the optimum deck in the first and GB2 games against the computer. The original game omitted only Electrode and Ditto from the Base/Jungle/Fossil union. (Unfortunately as they were significant cards to omit).
My undefeated GB2 deck is underrated. Never saw the idea implemented that way before, but it is flawless versus the computer.
My undefeated GB2 deck is underrated. Never saw the idea implemented that way before, but it is flawless versus the computer.
Otaku
Active Member
Yes, as I said in the post I was typing it in a hurry and accidentally typed "Electabuzz" instead of Electrode". The reason for my annoyance is that Base Set Electrode would have made an excellent combo for Zapdos: something to keep in play while you spam Zapdos and then when either you can't replay Zapdos anymore or fear its going to be KOed, Buzzap it into :lightning::lightning: and attach to Zapdos, then use your manual attachment to Big Thunder.
I have never heard this claim nor do I agree with it, unless perhaps you're fudging things and (at least in the first game) using the Continue Duel/Reset trick to prevent yourself from getting backfire results. Results like I got just multiple times the over the last eight or so hours. I was facing Nikki and it seemed like the game was just determined that I should keep getting poor opening hands and/or constantly nail my own Active with Zapdos' effect.
I brought Zapdos up as an underrated card because most players of the Game Boy game who have discussed it with me either write off all the "Legendary" cards as bad, or only like Articuno spam for Paralysis. Feel free to link me to discussions about Zapdos, as I can accept that I just happened to only converse with players who held the misconception that it was good. To "prove" it the best deck I'd like something a little more substantial: my own results with it have gone well but nothing has proven it better than a solid Haymaker build. Though to be fair, I guess I haven't tried using it in a Haymaker. Hmm...
Indeed: due to the computer's comparatively rare use of staples (or at least rare, effective use) Electrode might have been good. Ditto of course was a good card already. I will take this chance to once again point out I typed the wrong Pokemon.
Embarrassing but true.Magic_Umbreon
Researching Tower Scientist, Retired
I was referring to using Zapdos as an attacker not for its power, so no reset required. My personal criteria for ratings decks capabilities versus the computer is that it's OK to take advantage of the AI but not to reset. Using Challenge knowing the AI always lets you draw with it isn't really cheating, same with Computer Error and others, but in resetting you're changing the fundamental rules of the game in e.g. accessing information you shouldn't know. It doesn't make sense to me to insist on only using the same competitive player v player deck versus the AI, it's a different type of deckbuilding strategy. My YouTube video highlights a non-reset ie legitimate deck that will always beat the AI by taking advantage of it. I don't consider that cheating.