Pokémon TCG: Sword and Shield—Brilliant Stars

Win one and done.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Must be that "background noise" Bush is talking about. The "O-pine-ing"
 
Last edited:
I doubt regionals wouldn't give a trip to worlds.

1. why would they decrease the number of trips when number of players increase?
2. states give invites/trips whatever to nationals, they dont need doubling up

I think won and done will apply PER event type. Win a states, done, win a regionals, done. Win a trip, no GCs.
 
<--- Only read 1st page of this topic.

One and done? Blah. That makes the gyms later in the year much less competitive and easier to win and qualify for worlds in. Gyms lead up to the WORLD CHAMPIONSHIPS, so if the players that win the worlds trip simply by having all the other competition gone, that just messes the whole thing up. =/
 
But that should mean that they get eliminated at worlds anyway.

Even if you don't really accomplish anything, it's still fun to go to worlds. Why take that away from people?
 
SuperWooper said:
<--- Only read 1st page of this topic.
Click to expand...

Translation: I either don't care about being informed or am not smart enough to realize that by skipping these pages, I will likely be asking questions that have already been answered. Personally, I find it pretty rude. I went to the trouble of reading this whole thing because I knew that either there would be important points on the pages... or this would have already degenerated into a spam fest. Though looking at the last page it would seem the countdown to locking has begun.

SuperWooper said:
One and done? Blah. That makes the gyms later in the year much less competitive and easier to win and qualify for worlds in. Gyms lead up to the WORLD CHAMPIONSHIPS, so if the players that win the worlds trip simply by having all the other competition gone, that just messes the whole thing up. =/
Click to expand...

Lets try supporting you statement. Though much of this is probably due to your failure to read up on the topic, how exactly does having the winner, whose Trip would pass down anyway, not participate in a second tournament of the same level decrease the true competition. Unless of course said winner was playing Knockout for his/her buddies, in which case it is indeed easier for a legitimate player to win... though its harder for the the winner's friends to win since they now have to do it legitimately.

We all know that these tournaments are not truly determining the greatest in a city, a state, a country, or the world. That's impossible. You'd have to get everyone to participate to actually determine the greatest in the world. What's more, everyone would need a full compliment of cards and reasonable training time available.

Out of what is left, then you have to accept that some people can't travel as much as they'd like to compete. So the best still may not make it. Now allowing for these things, the current system just says "you cant play Knock Out to help out your less skilled friends and you can't suck up all the prize support Nintendo is giving in order to help their game thrive". Otherwise, the lack of a previous tournament winner being able to play just keeps them from hogging prize support (remember my point about world champs needing a good card base?) and from skiewing the odds already. If the best player in a given group wins and can't play against the rest, since he can't win the qualifier anyway, how is this making it easier for legitimate players to win their qualifier?
 
Okay so say we have this scenario. Two players are playing for first second at a regionals, they are both very skilled and like to travel to multiple regionals to play.
Player A, I concede, I want to be able to play in a future regionals and get more scholarship money.
Player B, no wait I concede, I want to be able to play in a future regionals and get more scholarship money.
Player A, no way I conceded first, you have to take the win!

How do we decide who wins? "force" them to play it out and see who wins? Lol, It will either be the first person to deck out (which will take a LONG time) or whoever pops more electrode ex before time runs out. Or we could just say either play it out or you both lose, but that doesn't make sense because you can't just go back and change who won/lost in top 4.

Just more random speculation but eh, I think this new idea is going to have more kinks in it that POP expected. We will have to see what the FAQ says.
 
I bet in that scenario both 1st and 2nd place will count as one and done. I mean they're both winning scholarship dough plus getting a trip to Worlds/Nationals.
 
Last edited:
Dude, Ice' hit it perfect there, i couldn't state my opinion better than he just did. Yeah its like

Dude, i SO conceded first! You have to take the win!
NO! I conceded too!
Judge: GAH! Just play it out!
Winner: NOOOOO i can't win another one!!! GAH!
Loser: =D *points and laughs*


Tom
 
Ice'Cold said:
Okay so say we have this scenario. Two players are playing for first second at a regionals, they are both very skilled and like to travel to multiple regionals to play.
Player A, I concede, I want to be able to play in a future regionals and get more scholarship money.
Player B, no wait I concede, I want to be able to play in a future regionals and get more scholarship money.
Player A, no way I conceded first, you have to take the win!

How do we decide who wins? "force" them to play it out and see who wins? Lol, It will either be the first person to deck out (which will take a LONG time) or whoever pops more electrode ex before time runs out. Or we could just say either play it out or you both lose, but that doesn't make sense because you can't just go back and change who won/lost in top 4.

Just more random speculation but eh, I think this new idea is going to have more kinks in it that POP expected. We will have to see what the FAQ says.
Click to expand...

Well, not really. On the contrary, "Win one and done" is a little more foolproof than one would think. Considering that the finals game at a regional makes a $500-$1000 difference, why would player A or player B risk the opportunity? The fact of the matter is, it is a BAD idea to risk $500+ dollars just because "you want to play again."

An analogy to further explain my thoughts would be the presidential elections. You have to win through the primary (swiss and most top cuts), and then compete in the main election (finals). Since you only get to be president for two terms in your life, are you seriously going to just forfeit the election? "Oh, I'm sorry, I have to forfeit this presidential election because I want to keep running for office and never win!"
 
Last edited:
Ice'Cold said:
Okay so say we have this scenario. Two players are playing for first second at a regionals, they are both very skilled and like to travel to multiple regionals to play.
Player A, I concede, I want to be able to play in a future regionals and get more scholarship money.
Player B, no wait I concede, I want to be able to play in a future regionals and get more scholarship money.
Player A, no way I conceded first, you have to take the win!

How do we decide who wins? "force" them to play it out and see who wins? Lol, It will either be the first person to deck out (which will take a LONG time) or whoever pops more electrode ex before time runs out. Or we could just say either play it out or you both lose, but that doesn't make sense because you can't just go back and change who won/lost in top 4.

Just more random speculation but eh, I think this new idea is going to have more kinks in it that POP expected. We will have to see what the FAQ says.
Click to expand...

They should both be disqualified for violation of spirit of the game and stripped of their professorship (if they have it).
 
I'd personally be very happy to win a Regionals, even knowing that I could not play in another.

Hmmm, I made it to the finals of my Regionals. Do I take the $2,000, trip to Nationals and possible trip to Worlds, or do I concede just so I can play in another one next week? Tough choice.
 
It depends. If 1st place and 2nd place are identical except 1st gets $500 more, I'd risk it.
 
Last edited:
Thats you, and for the sake of me sounding egotistical ill be the only one here to say I have confidence in my ability to win. After my sucess at regionals this previous year (first and second) I regret not traveling to far more regionals to trying to get more scholarship money. I'm in the same boat as venusaur. If it was a difference of only $500 and I knew I would be able to play in two more regionals, I'd probably forfeit first place to joe whoever and take the train somewhere else. And please, how does that violate spirit of the game OR their professorship. It's like the issue of legal stalling, I'll be the first one to push the rules as far as they go without breaking them. Now I just have to try to make that scenario happen this year to get my $20. Maybe I'll just have to gather the "posse" and get a plan going. Someone also said that "winning" should extend to first and second place. Second place is not a win, I don't care what the prizes are. When the white sox go to the world series and lose nowone is going to care how far they got, just the fact that they got there and lost. So in conclusion, Go Sox!
 
Adam, you forfeit that opportunity to play in another regional not because of issues involving confidence (I have a lot of it :smile: ), but rather common sense. $2000 is greater than $1500 or $1000, and despite the supposed insignificance of 500, when it comes to college, every bit does count (you know this well, being a senior in high school).

Maybe I'm just talking from a different angle, because like/unlike many players, I will not be able to attend multiple regionals. I'm only going to one almost guaranteed, so if I become regional champion, I wouldn't care if I were restricted from any other regionals.

Also, keep in mind that I do concede one point: if you can only go to 1, 2 or maybe even 3 regionals, don't risk such a big opportunity. However, if you're in Adam's shoes and can hit as many regionals as possible, certainly go for it! You're playing to win, but "win" can take on many definitions, including the highest bankroll at the end of the season. Also, conceding $1,000 to someone in the finals makes them happy, thus staying in line with Spirit of the Game =P
 
Exactly, sprit of the game and whatnot. Then again not everyone is willing to travel across the country to play in these things. I'll just be happy with the $20...
 
Rather amazed how confident some are about TCG matches. You know, a game inherently based upon luck. Let alone a game like ours with six cards randomly removed from your deck at the beginning of the game and one card you won't be able to use win or lose. This game still has quite a few coin flip based events as well. I myself have on occasion beaten players far better than myself. Not through their own mistakes, but by simply the luck of the draw. What do you do when you start with a single Pokemon and against the odds, get nothing but Energy as they quickly KO you?
 
Otaku said:
Rather amazed how confident some are about TCG matches. You know, a game inherently based upon luck. Let alone a game like ours with six cards randomly removed from your deck at the beginning of the game and one card you won't be able to use win or lose. This game still has quite a few coin flip based events as well. I myself have on occasion beaten players far better than myself. Not through their own mistakes, but by simply the luck of the draw. What do you do when you start with a single Pokemon and against the odds, get nothing but Energy as they quickly KO you?
Click to expand...

this has been dicussed here on the gym many times. Alot of the skill in this game is the deck building, and eleminating the luck as much as possibly plays a key role. For exzample, no one would dare to play a deck with no trainers, because you would be depentding on luck to when you get your pokemon/energy at the right time.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top