Theres only Lysandre, at which point they've already attacked and it doesn't matter as their Oricorio is gone unless they rescue stretcher it back, and have an energy, AND a Switch card to get it back out, in which case, well, gg.
Discussion Are Quad Decks becoming a Problem?
- Thread starter crystal_pidgeot
- Start date
I only say that because I question the actual setup of your deck, since you have to spend a turn to get it out and I assume you won't just sit on a handful of cards to prevent the attack from going off. Many are also running a heavy Hex Maniac count and can still turn it off.
The Machamp is a nice tech for the deck and exist for the Oricorio but how many do you play with and is it worth the space to stop a card you might not see?
What I'm actually saying is that because one deck abuses a certain card or combination of cards, it should never warrant a ban of that card for all decks.What about them?
If we consider the history of cards actually banned in the Pokémon TCG, all of them could help something underpowered (relative to the other top decks) perform adequately. I do not believe this is a valid concern. Regrettable, but not a reason a card should avoid being banned. Indeed, to me a basic process of card design should be "Does this make anything too good? If so, we ought not to release this card."
What I'm actually saying is that because one deck abuses a certain card or combination of cards, it should never warrant a ban of that card for all decks.
That's the very reason a ban should be made. All those disruption cards are what make those quad deck good. Team Skull Grunt also makes it impossible to play around the assault of energy removal. I would be fine with Team Skull Grunt getting the ban hammer for the sake of a healthy game but this is why I like a restriction list to put cards like Team Skull Grunt to one per deck so that way you don't ban something not really ban worthy.
That is the hard part (predicting an Oricorio), and I just run just a 1-1 line but it's actually been pretty consistent strangely enough. I originally wanted to tech it because I thought Alolan Ninetales might be a danger, but then I played against an Oricorio tech and realized it helped there too. I think what I would do is A: find out what decks tech Oricorio usually and B: if it becomes like every other deck is packing an Oricorio, increase the Machoke line. Honestly, though, it is kind of a shaky counter but it's worth the space to me because it prevents simply auto-losing, and helps against some other decks too. Also, Vespiquen's setup has always been nutty fast, it's one of its key charictaristics. With Forest, i've gotten 3 Vespiquens and a Combee in play turn one.
This makes alot of sense. However, Skull Grunt is completely luck based and if they miss it, it's a huge loss of tempo on their part as they just completely wasted their supporter, which gives you a window to catch up. Crushing Hammer also shouldn't be limited to just one as it's ENTIRELY luck based. I mean, I guess people that use Skull Grunt can tech a Gumshoos, but Crushing Hammer is just a coin flip, meaning only allowing one would mean taking every last bit of playability out of it. But I think Team Flare Grunt is the worst offender here, there's no luck to it, it just shuts you off for a turn. It almost might as well say, "Your opponent can't attack during their next turn." Anyways, I'm down with what your saying here. Limiting major disruption like Grunts to one I agree with.
A few things here. In my Quad Pidgeot deck, and I assume this is true for other Quad decks, is I always had a turn to just burn a Supporter, which was a Skull Grunt or a Team Rockets Handiwork. For me, even if I wasted a Skull Grunt, it still gave me some information. My opponent doesn't have Energy or something to help them and I can plan my turns accordingly. That information alone is good, even more so if I have a Talonflame in the active spot. Banning Team Skull Grunt means Energy in a players hand is at least safe, given all the energy removal options that exist. Yes, the "luck" part is not knowing their hand but you get to see what they have. This is why Talonflame is so good in my Quad Pidgeot deck and why Sylveon-GX is good with these cards because you now know what you want to take out of the deck.
Crushing Hammer is another thing. I believe @Otaku hates cards with coin flips because you never know how good they will be. I don't know if you played during the HGSS early BW days but there was a card called Pokemon Reversal, which has the effect of "post errata" Pokemon Catcher. The card was always bad, just like Energy Removal 2, which is Crushing Hammer now, except it never picked up but one day Magnaboar players decided to play Pokemon Reversal because of the decks ability to KO anything it wanted in one hit. A Worlds match happened (don't remember it completely) and one player in this mirror flipped all heads on their Reversals and the other flipped tails on theirs. This is the reason Pokemon Catcher (first version) was created and that was to make sure all players could guarantee their target but this was deemed too good and rather than banning the card, they just made it the "new" Pokemon Reversal, putting us where we once were and then placed the effect on a Supporter, which is still too good. After all this time, we proved once again as players that this effect is too good for the game and shouldn't exist, at least on a Trainer.
Crushing Hammer could get this same treatment and get a version of it without the coin flip, which will break the game and with Turbo Dark still being a thing, this could happen. I'm not saying these things can't exist because nothing (except win conditions) should be completely safe but the hand should be safer than the play field. For example, I feel my energy is safer in play, where more threats to it exist, than they do in my hand because Team Skull Grunt exist. This is the reason Quad decks are so good because you can't manage your energy, a resource needed to win the game because they can still discard them with no real interaction
I've actually only played since BREAKpoint, and a hammer without a flip sounds busted. Anyways, It is true that Skull Grunt made it so your Energy isn't safe anywhere but I feel the kick in the teeth it gives you for missing it makes it okay. What I think has the potential to be extremely nasty is Skull Grunt combined with Gumshoos as it takes Skull Grunt's debuff away. Also, Energy discarded from your hand isn't Energy you spent time attaching, so while Skull Grunt is annoying, Energy recovery can repair the damage by it. If these Quad-Whatever decks become meta dominating, just like always, their will be a rock to it's scissor. Other decks will tech things like Brock's Grit, Item punishing one energy Garb will explode these decks, and to decks that have built in Energy recovery like Turbo Dark, Volcanion, and Lurantis these Quad decks will be little more than annoying. So, while the majority of these Quad decks are mindless and annoying, they'll be stomped eventually.
I think they're definitely too good considering how thoughtless they are to play. If you compare Houndoom Mill for example to one of these contemporary disruption lists, Mill couldn't actually be an offensive threat which controlled how effective it could be. Houndoom required a very good player of the deck to get decent results. Quad Lapras is probably the most brainless deck I have ever played.
People have been saying for years how much the current format is resembling base and this might be the last thing we were missing, mass energy disruption spam. Every deck before the first rotation ran 4 energy removal (it was hammer without a flip, and yes it was busted) and 4 super energy removal (even more busted). I HIGHLY doubt they would ever reprint base set energy removal. It would be even worse than reprinting gust of wind like they did.
Powerful energy disruption and low cost forced switch cards were what made evolutions not named Blastoise or Wigglytuff unplayable in base. I think they're trying to encourage more evolution. Then again, if they see a worlds match where it comes down to hammers flips, maybe they might forget exactly why the first rotation was careful to cut out all of the most broken trainers of the base era including those.
People have been saying for years how much the current format is resembling base and this might be the last thing we were missing, mass energy disruption spam. Every deck before the first rotation ran 4 energy removal (it was hammer without a flip, and yes it was busted) and 4 super energy removal (even more busted). I HIGHLY doubt they would ever reprint base set energy removal. It would be even worse than reprinting gust of wind like they did.
Powerful energy disruption and low cost forced switch cards were what made evolutions not named Blastoise or Wigglytuff unplayable in base. I think they're trying to encourage more evolution. Then again, if they see a worlds match where it comes down to hammers flips, maybe they might forget exactly why the first rotation was careful to cut out all of the most broken trainers of the base era including those.
The debuff with Skull Grunt doesn't matter to Quad decks. Lapras can draw three cards, My Pidgeot decks has Talonflame to search for two cards and Sylveon-GX has a search three. I see your hand and can then search my deck for what I need. If I see your hand has no energy, I can decide to take a Team Flare Grunt to predict a top deck or continue my defense. Turbo Dark can't afford this card, because it doesn't have synergy with it. it would much rather spend a Support to draw cards but the Quad decks don't care about this. What is even better, I can setup a Delinquent play if their hand is also Supporter-less.
With basic Pokemon being so good nowadays, you can pretty much a "Prerelease" deck with just four really good basic (I guess most quad decks are at least five Pokemon now) and heavy disruption and still win a game because the opponent can't play. I guess garb decks are a thing but do we really want a play this style or counter format?
What I was insinuating was that we should not ban cards unless they have become hazardous to the competitive scene to the brink of a tournament being only that deck and whatever counters it. But when you start limiting one or two cards, it makes the entire rule set that much more of a hassle to explain to newcomers. I know multiple people who left Yu Gi Oh because the rules became so confusing. While the PTCG won't become anything like Yu Gi Oh anytime soon, if we keep demanding bans and extra rule changes, the game will become a mess. I have stated this before, and I will say it for the final time: we, as the players, need to step up our game and either beat them or be them.
Gust of Wind is Lysandre as an item right? Thats. Friggin. BUSTED. Anyways, what crystal pidgeot said about Lapras or Sylveon not caring about wasting a supporter, I just realized how true that is. I think the truly effective counter to this deck is the new Garb as they're so freakin item heavy and Garb's attack is only one Energy (busted) and also what is Super Energy Removal? Is that, like, discard 2 or something really ridiculous?
Pokemon will never be as ruling heavy as Yu-Gi-Oh. The main reason for that is Pokemon cards are written to be understood unless the odd card like Steven is made where a ruling needs to be made but Pokemon players are smart, new and old. We don't need more rules, just better ones. Not all cards are broken enough to be banned but are too good at four per deck so putting them down to 1 or two may help without completely removing it from the game.
I also agree players should play better but we shouldn't expect player to deal with game flaws and say "well, its your fault" when the option doesn't exist. Night March, Vespiquen and Quad decks would never have happen in any other card game with Ban/Restriction list and side decks. It a shame we Just got a card like Oricorio when the game doesn't need them right now. Its nice to have them but we are two whole TCG blocks behind. Thats like 27 sets or something before we actually got a counter. We should not have had to wait as long as we had to for Field Blower. There is only so much we can do as players. Now in the case of Garbodor, I agree that's a case of the players need to step it up. You have no idea how many people I hear wanting Garbodor banned (the new one). It would be a shame if it was banned too.
Don't forget about the first run of Pokemon Catcher, that too was a Gust of Wind before they added the coin flip to it because people complained. Super Energy did discard two Energy but you had to remove one on your Pokemon as well. it was still busted though.
It is true that they made some rather overpowered one Energy attacks, when you combine them with the disruption cards we have in the Standard format, but I think there had to be more ways to search and draw while not using Items because of the new Garbodor. Another reason that Garbodor is messed up. However, you also can use that same Garbodor to punish Quad decks. It has a one Energy attack and Quad decks need to play Items to disrupt you, whether they like it or not. Once they've used/discarded 9 or 10, depending on the deck, you can one shot them and they cannot respond with much. I personally see one or two disruption cards being considered for the banlist but nothing is less certain than that. As a side note, Lurantis-GX (I really think it is good now because of the new Choice Band) is a perfect counter for Quad Lapras (240 damage with Solar Blade and Energy retrieval to cancel out disruption). As for Sylveon-GX, it is about being able to one shot them, which is hard, given the disruption at their disposal, but still feasible. Mega Rayquaza does it, Mega Gardevoir PCL has the potential to do so and basically anything that can hit 170 damage before Choice Band can. Mega Scizor is another example and I also think it will get better because of a decreasing amount of Volcanion decks (I expect that at least, since Turbo Water should be a thing. We'll be able to see once the set gets Standard legal). Quad decks are annoying but manageable matchups for sure. The Pokémon lineup being so streamlined means that if one fails, they all fail. You have to remember that and look for their weak point,
Dude, Vespiquen isn't broken, have you ever played it? Its hard, its not, like, a cakewalk. Your main attackers (Vespi and Zoroark) have 90 and 100hp respectively. You always have to have another one ready or you just flat out lose, and DCEs are easily discarded by E-Hammers. You're always within like 10 cards of decking yourself, sometimes you discard all your attackers by a bad Sycamore, and like I said, since you're within 10 cards of decking yourself sometimes you don't get enough mons in the discard to one-shot things, item lock absolutely crushes Vespiquen, as it even gets one-shotted by Decidueye, but you can't keep streaming Vespis and Decidueye has 240HP. Maybe Vespiquen in Expanded is more broken (as if their aren't tons of broken things in Expanded), but still. There are counters, Oricorio and Karen, but no one uses them. Anyways, Vespi is not the culprit here, quit picking on my bees
I don't think they are a problem, because while they are very good against a lot of decks, they are also simply terrible against some others. As @datoneguy760 mentioned on the last page - if they only have a single plan of attack, then once that fails - they don't have a plan B. Which makes them fine for the PCTGO metagame, where you can have as many bad match-ups as you have time to climb the ladder, but they are going to fall short in real life tournament settings.
The *perfect* deck in terms of consistency would be some kind of quad deck. Take fifteen different cards, and multiply it by four. However, in real terms, a *better* deck has multiple strategies to handle different scenarios. If you want to win every game, you have to be able to adapt your gameplan on the fly. The current Lapras and Sylveon decks seem to find it very difficult to pull this off. I don't think we'll be seeing either making a huge splash for this reason.
The *perfect* deck in terms of consistency would be some kind of quad deck. Take fifteen different cards, and multiply it by four. However, in real terms, a *better* deck has multiple strategies to handle different scenarios. If you want to win every game, you have to be able to adapt your gameplan on the fly. The current Lapras and Sylveon decks seem to find it very difficult to pull this off. I don't think we'll be seeing either making a huge splash for this reason.
Sylveon has no problem adapting its gameplan to basically anything except item lock and even then, in expanded I've won games with Sylveon after being turn 1 item locked,. You can get Lysandres without reliance on topdecks or VS Seeker which allows you to play the mill game or remove the lock through attacking. Particularly potent against trev and toad locks but also good against plume if they didn't get the float stone down on Vileplume.
It's also not terrible against Garb if you run a Kukui, the energy denial version of Garb is a little better against it but you don't actually need to expend items to deal with it. Garb does easily deal with quad lapras but unless you can N every turn or force item discards with delinquents (which is generally dumb luck) Sylveon doesn't actually need to play many cards to stream OHKOs on Garbodor. Just take a DCE, Kukui and VS Seeker with your first ribbon and you can knock down two garbs for one item in discard.
Or in expanded, DCE/Target Whistle/Lysandre, lysandre in a Shaymin, KO it then target whistle it back on the bench, get a VS seeker or your 2nd Lysandre and smack it again.
It's also not terrible against Garb if you run a Kukui, the energy denial version of Garb is a little better against it but you don't actually need to expend items to deal with it. Garb does easily deal with quad lapras but unless you can N every turn or force item discards with delinquents (which is generally dumb luck) Sylveon doesn't actually need to play many cards to stream OHKOs on Garbodor. Just take a DCE, Kukui and VS Seeker with your first ribbon and you can knock down two garbs for one item in discard.
Or in expanded, DCE/Target Whistle/Lysandre, lysandre in a Shaymin, KO it then target whistle it back on the bench, get a VS seeker or your 2nd Lysandre and smack it again.
To be honest with you, Garbodor doesn't really hurt all that much until you get a few cards in. Both my Quad Pidgeot and Sylveon deck run Max Potion. The two decks can tank enough before before having to play them and can live just on Supporters while you're doing little to no damage at all. These decks can also hit hard and one or two shot a Garb.
I don't mean Vespiquen is broken but it was a example of a deck that needed a counter that didn't get one until Oricorio, which was way too late. We needed Oricorio back when Night March was a thing. When a bee player got Pokemon in the discard pile, there was nothing you could do about it, Not even Karen was used because it helped your opponent in other matchups like Mega Ray and Mega Gardevoir. Huge numbers on a one prize attacker that could always get them back is what makes the deck powerful.
Dude, Vespiquen isn't broken, have you ever played it? Its hard, its not, like, a cakewalk. Your main attackers (Vespi and Zoroark) have 90 and 100hp respectively. You always have to have another one ready or you just flat out lose, and DCEs are easily discarded by E-Hammers. You're always within like 10 cards of decking yourself, sometimes you discard all your attackers by a bad Sycamore, and like I said, since you're within 10 cards of decking yourself sometimes you don't get enough mons in the discard to one-shot things, item lock absolutely crushes Vespiquen, as it even gets one-shotted by Decidueye, but you can't keep streaming Vespis and Decidueye has 240HP. Maybe Vespiquen in Expanded is more broken (as if their aren't tons of broken things in Expanded), but still. There are counters, Oricorio and Karen, but no one uses them. Anyways, Vespi is not the culprit here, quit picking on my bees
I don't mean Vespiquen is broken but it was a example of a deck that needed a counter that didn't get one until Oricorio, which was way too late. We needed Oricorio back when Night March was a thing. When a bee player got Pokemon in the discard pile, there was nothing you could do about it, Not even Karen was used because it helped your opponent in other matchups like Mega Ray and Mega Gardevoir. Huge numbers on a one prize attacker that could always get them back is what makes the deck powerful.
What I'm actually saying is that because one deck abuses a certain card or combination of cards, it should never warrant a ban of that card for all decks.
Banning cards from certain decks is an enforcement nightmare that makes Yu-Gi-Oh look quaint.
The real answer is R&D needs to focus on better balance with what they release so that we don't need bans. I've gone on at length in miscellaneous message board posts on such a matter; if you're interested, I can try to make some time later this week to explain in a PM. If not, no worries; we disagree and I can live with that, but the short version is that this game's pacing is all messed up, and because of that, core game mechanics like Evolution don't function as they ought to. Possibly, it is something the player base is doing, missing the existing answers.
Probably not, though; the game's rules have received too many revisions, and we've had some really obvious bad calls (like releasing Lysandre's Trump Card) for me to give R&D that much credit. With pacing being the factor that hurts most cards (and cost us our first turn attacks), taking out the cards that increase the pace of the game to stupid levels seems like the best answer. Yes, even if those cards also help many other decks. Getting back to the "no worries" part, I do not think that is the direction a future ban list will take.