Consistency vs Techs
- Thread starter mute2
- Start date
RE: Consistency<versus>Techs
It depends on the type of deck that you're running and your local metagame. Certain decks like VirGen function best without techs, while Aromatisse can benefit from them greatly. A deck like Aromatisse is essentially made of techs; you focus on the ones that will give you the advantage in the current matchup and disregard the others. As we've seen from Pooka's deck, which when undefeated at Vancouver Regionals, this sort of a deck can pack a real punch in the hands of an experienced player who's had ample time for testing; techy decks like these are not easy to master.
Rogue decks in general focus on techs, as their goal is to counter specific common threats in the metagame. This is essentially a different philosophy of deckbuilding and play style, compared to playing "all around" cards and getting the same setup every game. Part of the success of decks like these is their surprise factor, especially with most players having tested against the metagame and have difficulty responding to something unfamiliar.
On the other hand, a lot of the commonly played decks do better without techs. Yveltal, Virgen, and Plasma are based around playing specific cards as quickly as possible, every game. They're not trying to exploit your Pokemon's weaknesses (though a bad matchup can certainly lead to that), they're just using fast and efficient attacks to rack up damage as quickly as possible. Putting too many techs into these takes space away from searches and draw support, and clogs your deck. That's why most of the big event winning VirGen decks (among others) tend to have rather straightforward lists; they can get what they need when they need it, and nothing is clogging them up.
It depends on the type of deck that you're running and your local metagame. Certain decks like VirGen function best without techs, while Aromatisse can benefit from them greatly. A deck like Aromatisse is essentially made of techs; you focus on the ones that will give you the advantage in the current matchup and disregard the others. As we've seen from Pooka's deck, which when undefeated at Vancouver Regionals, this sort of a deck can pack a real punch in the hands of an experienced player who's had ample time for testing; techy decks like these are not easy to master.
Rogue decks in general focus on techs, as their goal is to counter specific common threats in the metagame. This is essentially a different philosophy of deckbuilding and play style, compared to playing "all around" cards and getting the same setup every game. Part of the success of decks like these is their surprise factor, especially with most players having tested against the metagame and have difficulty responding to something unfamiliar.
On the other hand, a lot of the commonly played decks do better without techs. Yveltal, Virgen, and Plasma are based around playing specific cards as quickly as possible, every game. They're not trying to exploit your Pokemon's weaknesses (though a bad matchup can certainly lead to that), they're just using fast and efficient attacks to rack up damage as quickly as possible. Putting too many techs into these takes space away from searches and draw support, and clogs your deck. That's why most of the big event winning VirGen decks (among others) tend to have rather straightforward lists; they can get what they need when they need it, and nothing is clogging them up.
RE: Consistency vsTechs
#1 Rule of the Pokémon TCG: Consistency is king.
Seriously. It makes logical sense after all--if your deck isn't consistent, then it doesn't matter how many techs you put in, it still won't work often enough to succeed in a tournament setting.
Of course, there are decks that are still consistent even with a lot of techs, and decks that are quite literally designed around their techs, but consistency comes first. The only time you should ever sacrifice consistency for a tech is if you expect to face a certain matchup a huge number of times in a day (which is rarely the case). Teching is fine, but only if you have room in an already consistent deck.
#1 Rule of the Pokémon TCG: Consistency is king.
Seriously. It makes logical sense after all--if your deck isn't consistent, then it doesn't matter how many techs you put in, it still won't work often enough to succeed in a tournament setting.
Of course, there are decks that are still consistent even with a lot of techs, and decks that are quite literally designed around their techs, but consistency comes first. The only time you should ever sacrifice consistency for a tech is if you expect to face a certain matchup a huge number of times in a day (which is rarely the case). Teching is fine, but only if you have room in an already consistent deck.
I tend to prefer techs. It's fun to run a bunch of different pokemon. In some cases, you have to thanks to cards like Pyroar and even Safeguard Pokemon. Losing because of one Pokemon with a protection ability is not fun.
That said, the best decks are those which have built in answers to common metagame problems. It's why I think Garbodor + Big Attacker decks are so powerful. Over power an opponent with superior attackers while shutting off their abilities with Garbodor. Simple but effective.
That said, the best decks are those which have built in answers to common metagame problems. It's why I think Garbodor + Big Attacker decks are so powerful. Over power an opponent with superior attackers while shutting off their abilities with Garbodor. Simple but effective.
I find techs to work out well for me. Techs could fix your draw support or your match up against big threats like pyroar or something. Though some techs do not work as well with straight forward decks like genesect. Majority of the time, techs is something you wanna try out intead of slamming it in your deck.