How Do You Build a Trainer Line for a Deck?

RunningWithScizors

RunningWithScizors

Aspiring Trainer
Member
I have no trouble building a Pokemon line for a deck, and it's easy building the energy line for a deck, but I keep running into problems trying to build the Trainer/Supporter/Stadium line for a deck. I keep looking at what's used in everything and say, "well, this is used, and this, and this, and..." and pretty soon, I have no room left in my deck. I feel I need to be prepared for everything. How does one go about fixing this problem? what is your approach to deckbuilding?
 
I consider cards fall in few categories or ranks; "Staples", "Near Staples", "Techy/Niches" and "Draw". I'll use these to sort of group the card priorities in deck building. :)

Staple cards are those such as Professor Juniper and VS Seeker. If there is a card you want to be constantly drawing throughout every game, I'd consider it a staple, and most important in deck building. Stadiums and cards that actually make your strategy work generally fall into this category.

I then have cards that I consider "Near Staples". You can probably play a deck fine without it, but the card fills a common niche hence its utility. This includes things like Lysandre and Hoopa-EX, as both can positively effect each game. I generally run one or two of these, as I don't necessarily need them.

I then have the more Techy/Niche cards. These are generally the cards that can be really useful against certain matchups. This would include things like Enhanced Hammer and Head Ringer, which are really defined in what they affect. They are also dead cards in certain matchups (such as decks using no Special Energy or no EXs), which is why they are last priority. These often only have a couple of copies each as well, for the said reason.

Additional draw and consistency cards are probably least in priority. This includes things like Acro Bike and Trainer's Mail, which simply quicken up your deck. This does not include things like Ultra Ball and Shaymin-EX, as they are more so staples. That said, extra of these said staples may fall into this category. By the time I finish deck building, I rarely have space for extra draw, although simple, solid decks such as Manectric-EX utilise draw power quite well.

Hope that helps. :3
 
How many of each (as a ballpark figure) do you typically run in, say, a speed deck and in a consistency deck? Remember, you have to run Spirit Links in a Mega deck, and I'm sure that doesn't really fit any of those categories (not really staple, not really niche).
 
Spirit Link is something I consider a staple, as you really do need it for the deck to run properly. For your ballpark figure, I suggest pigbacking off the counts used in Mega builds that have recently got top places in Regionals. You can find some here.

Speed Decks and Consistency Decks generally run similar counts of cards. The primary difference is that some prefer to use specific categories more so over others. Speed decks would generally use things like Trainer Mail's and Acro Bike, while consistency decks generally have the option to run techs (but also Trainer's Mail) and often have more of each card.
 
I generally don't have time to run through a bunch of decklists. What were the numbers of each you generally saw of each category in a typical deck?
 
RunningWithScizors said:
I generally don't have time to run through a bunch of decklists. What were the numbers of each you generally saw of each category in a typical deck?
Click to expand...

The numbers I quote will be roughly the same as the decklists I linked. If you're looking for numbers for a specific deck type (Mega, Disruption, Discard, Standard etc), then there is more often that not a good decklist that trainer numbers can be taken from. :)
 
I was looking more for general numbers of each category (X staples, X tech cards, etc.) that I could use as a guideline when I'm finished picking all the Pokemon and Energy for my deck. You know, something like a template I can use when making a new deck from scratch.
 
I really don't think there is a definite number of cards for each category. Staples are really the only group with a set structure which is simply deemed the best to use. Generally these staples will consist of 4 Professor Juniper, 2 other draw Supporters (i.e. N), 1-3 Shaymin-EX (2 normal, 3 speed), 4 VS Seeker, 4 Ultra Ball and 1 Computer Search (in Expanded) from looking at the recent Autumn Regional top decks.
 
That's for Extended, but what about Standard? (Not going into Regionals until February.)

And how am I ever going to figure out how to fill in the rest? That's where I get into overflow/consistency problems.
 
Those counts are practically the same for Standard as it is for Expanded. It could change if Cities results show different, but currently that count is the typical.

Honestly, this is also very difficult to teach as a theorymon practice. You really only learn by independently observing top decklists, and creating your own decklists and then refining them with others. I suggest posting your decklist in the Deck Garage, show it privately to a friend or privately PM it to myself if you're getting problems. We're here to help! :)

I'd just like to point out that even the best of the best won't get their decklist right first time around! That's why you may hear a lot about testing - its what all top competitive players do to improve their decklist and improve their playing skills.

If you're still a bit confused, I recommend checking out this guide, which explores deck building. Note that it's a bit outdated in regards to card counts but otherwise it targets current principles from draw to finding counters to deck problems.
 
That's the problem - I really like to build decks completely out from scratch, and I like to get them as right as I can before I start testing. However, I feel like my consistency/setup has really suffered in Standard - can't get anything out when I want to or fast enough. And when I do, I can't seem to get my reserves out fast enough - no ability to rebound from KO's. I really don't have any decklists because I'm struggling to find a Standard one that fits my needs in the first place! And finding good deckbuilding-from-scratch advice is hard. That's why I ask for a template/templates. Makes it all easier.
 
I think you're searching for something with too high stakes and much too quickly. Getting a 'as perfect as possible' deck list first round is virtually impossible. If you're worried about the speed, consistency and bouncing back... it's dependent to the list. It is much more practical to get feedback on your already created lists so any problems can be specifically and accurately diagnosed and treated.

Deck building is a skill based on experience and observation. You just can't find templates like that you're looking for outside winning decks, and even then, that requires a great deal of analysis and observation so the lists are actually useful. Deck building takes time to master and each new list requires extended testing if it is to become successful. My suggestion is to search for feedback after you make a list, not the other way around. :)
 
Problem is, I don't really want to analyze. I want to hone the art of deckbuilding before I get back into the game - also the reason why I want templates to build decks around and raw numbers re: number of techs/draw cards/etc. that are generally in a good deck. That way I have some data to fiddle around with, something to use with which I can get better. (I actually like having data in numbers/other short bites of info as opposed to looking at tons and tons of info that may or may not be relevant.)

And I really don't have much time to test things out. How much time do I need to devote? Losing frustrates me.

And I still need to know what a good Standard deck might be for me....
 
Unfortunately, that is just not how it works. A successful player will be required to spend time on and analyse their hobby, as it is for any hobby from sports to gaming to music.

If you're looking for some Standard decks, check out the Metagame Deck Discussion. If you're still stuck, it wouldn't hurt to ask around the "What Deck Should I Play?" thread or venture through the Deck Garage.
 
Keep in mind that even if you do base your deck off an existing deck list, you aren't suddenly guaranteed a win or even a necessarily better experience. A huge portion of being successful is knowing your deck through and through, and that requires analysis and playtesting (which things like PTCGO are great for). It's very unlikely for a deck to be optimal to your playstyle at first go, even if you had numbers to go by.

For comparison, my current main Standard deck has 31 revisions already over the past year, about 10 of which occurred before my first match with it. My older deck I used in the previous Standard format had 26 total. (I keep track of each revision in case I need to go backwards. :p) Such is the nature of having a competitive hobby -- it takes time and work both before and after your match.

But to give my build process:

I do it in order of Pokemon, Energy, Trainers. And I usually will add upwards of 70 cards to my deck total. Then comes the 'reduction to 60' process (asking myself "Do I really need this?" for each card). There are no set numbers of each category that I strive for, as each deck will require different resources. For example, a deck with Pokemon that have low energy costs will naturally require fewer energy.

The best you can do in your predicament, as bb has suggested, is look at current metadecks for inspiration, and try to adjust them to the Pokemon / Damage Output you'll be harnessing.
 
^I'm going to ignore all of this, not because I'm rude, but because a lot of it is very confusing.

I'll use mega rayquaza as a start. The day the set came out I took everything I felt comfortable with and everything I felt was viable for the deck and put it in there at the start. I played enough games or got to a point where I felt certain cards were better then others and came up with x amount of extra cards. So for instance I got to a point where in a 60 card deck 20 cards seemed more optional then the 40 initially in the deck you would consider staples, the extra 20 could be anything or something viable to increase the consistency of the other 40 cards in the deck.

I've talked to tons of players about this kind of deck building process for years and I find it's one of those things that moves across the board. Everyone has a different way of looking at it at it but at the end of the day all you want is the best consistency and if one card is better then another for you that's just how things go.
 
Yo-yos, could you explain that kind of deck-building process to me? Do I have to physically drag all the cards out myself, or just make a mental/written list? PM me if the details take too long.

Also, can you post a partial list (say one without Trainers) to the Deck Garage and ask for help in building the Trainer line from others? Perhaps I can see then how others build Trainer lines is by seeing others fill in the blanks for me.
 
Yo-yos said:
^I'm going to ignore all of this, not because I'm rude, but because a lot of it is very confusing.
Click to expand...
I find it confusing too, but for a different reason. I don't get how anyone can have a default number of Trainers they aim for when that's largely dependent on the Pokemon and gameplan you run. Sure, there are staples that nearly every deck uses, but as you said yourself, with playtesting you'll often find that many cards of your initial deck are unneeded and replaceable.

My post was mostly in response to Scissors saying he doesn't want to take time to analyze his deck, but he also wants to do well with it. Those two things don't seem compatible. Even if it's based on a proven Championship-winning deck list, if you don't know why you're running what you're running, it's going to lose.
 
It's not that I don't want to analyze a deck, it's just that I want the deckbuilding process (especially the Trainer line!) broken down into something digestible and easy to understand. And for me that means a template, raw numbers, something I can plug and play with. Something to take most of the guesswork out of building the Trainer line.

Also, another problem is, I generally don't think much along the lines of a gameplan, other than "to win the game." Knock Out my opponent's Pokemon before they can Knock me Out. Strategy? I generally don't think too hard about it.
 
If every Archetype ran the same way every deck would have the same engine and amount of cards needed, but that's not the case, it's about finding something that works for that deck not an over generic card that works, some decks use one card that no other deck uses, spirit link, energy based cards, etc. And when you get away from spending time on how the deck actually works versus what is popular your not actually building a decklist that works your just assuming to think that it's good w/o knowing if it actually is.

Again test, playtest everything, that's it, if some cards are considered "staples" because they are good and you do well with them play them, but at least be willing to try things out to get an understanding of what is good or not good, get some experience in by testing against regional or winning decklists in general, consistency is more important then what is a staple in every deck.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top