Woaaah this giratina and garchomp GX is absolutely strong!
SM10a \'GG End\' Mini-Set in April
- Thread starter Water Pokémon Master
- Start date
It's easier to use 2 Psychic Recharges and a Distortion Door and then have an attacker that doesn't need to get benched again than it is to have an attacker that needs 3 Psychic Recharges and needs to constantly go back to the bench. Baby Giratina makes damaging their board easy, and for 3 Energy total you do more damage than Ultra Necrozma. GG End can also help you with erasing something on your opponent board that is threatening, like a mon with a bunch of Energy stacked on it in NagaQuag. ChompTina also lives a lot longer with 90 more HP. A PikaRom for example is likely not going to be able to OHKO ChompTina, unlike Ultra Necrozma. There is definitely a very strong and fair argument for ChompTina over Ultra Necrozma.
You lose against lost match and other non-gx decks, though.
That is the reason ultra necrozma is good. It's your auto win to lost march that the deck most definitely needs.
And don't say that malamar can just prize trade with baby tina.
If we're going to compare stuff, what's easier:
Attaching an energy to a jumpluff/natu and taking a KO
or
Having a free retreater in the front (preferably jirachi), 2 minimum malamar on the bench (if you go this route you need an energy), and a tina in the discard.
My point is that lost march just needs an energy and an attacker, and malamar needs a fully set-up bench.
Guzma makes this task very hard.
The matchup can be swayed with spell tag, but no one plays that right now, and you definitely won't be playing it with the dragon type (what's the ship name) gartina (?).
A new story has just been posted to PokéBeach's front page:
Posts you make after this point will immediately appear on the front page and vice versa. Discuss!
Posts you make after this point will immediately appear on the front page and vice versa. Discuss!
Sweet. I can see this being a staple in fighting decks.
This makes M&M TTGX better now. Shoot even baby Garchomp can be brought to a fight since it is a slow set up. Card should see some solid play.
5/5 litleos in zororoc because now DCE claw slash is a thing
Why play counter gain when this just does the same + can be fighting.
Wow!
I like this card a lot. I REALLY agree with @Christopher Shehan’s above comment.
You know, only one person has said anything about how Garchomp & Giratina GX can hit 240 for 2 energy, and can be fully supplied by Malamar.
I like this card a lot. I REALLY agree with @Christopher Shehan’s above comment.
You know, only one person has said anything about how Garchomp & Giratina GX can hit 240 for 2 energy, and can be fully supplied by Malamar.
Counter Gain on steroids for fighting types, anything that has [F] attack cost, I approve!
That’s not exactly true. I can see where you’re going with this, but the Belt ONLY takes away Fighting. For example, if you attach a Black Belt to Buzzwole, you can use Sledgehammer for [] and Swing Around for [F][C], while if you attach Counter Gain, you use Sledgehammer for [F] and Swing Around for [F][F]. Say you attach those to Silvally GX ~ Counter Gain lets you attack for [C][C], while (no Fighting Energy in the attack cost) a Black Belt lets you attack for [C][C][C].
Over-explanation time!
Are you sure about this?
The wording just seems odd as a colorless energy is just whatever energy. Take a look at thunder mountain for example, doesnt that work the same way?
Thunder Mountain cannot remove [C] attack cost
It doesn’t. When ATTACHING Energy, Colorless can be represented by any energy, that’s correct: but the cards in question, they decrease the attack cost by what is literally in the cost. If something removes [F], then the attack cost must contain -1 [F]. IF there are no [F] in the first place, then Black Belt has nothing to take away from and doesn’t do anything. I could argue your point with you if only we didn’t have Counter Gain.
Either way, attack costs and energy removals from them must be taken by a literal, side-by-side comparison.
