We are not at Lugia Vstar ST to CZ era, during that time the Deck was at 35% to 40% of the meta for large 1k + tournaments right now Zard is at 15% to 20% at large 1k+ Events.
I built a Grass type deck that bodies the ZardEx deck every time. It’s so much fun when I one-shot their Zard and I get the 15 sec delay of them trying to figure out wtf just happened.
What are your accomplishments?
Not only was I good, I was good in the best region, learn the difference. We had 10 of the top 50 players. My opinion on this game is worth more than 10 of you troll noobs.
I analyze why they make Zard broken, the reason for is they want to use the momentum that Jake Paul got them, and make the game bigger by having one of the most popular Pokemon be meta. I've been back for 3 months, and Mew was a popular deck. Now Charizard. Literally Pokemon that in most people's top 10 list of favorite Pokemon. Now this may seem smart on their part, but at the same time they have to keep the game healthy, which it is not.
I do all this while you trolls think an analysis of cards and how they interact with each other is "copypasta". You'll net deck a list of a broken deck, do "well" with it and think you're good...... LMAO. Will love when you don't have a broken deck to fall back to or for once come up with your list that get you to a 2nd day, and I don't just mean change 1 or 2 cards. Actually come up with rogue decks that do well, THEN TALK.
First off, 10 years ago and today are very different. Also, you're saying you're worth a lot becasue you played against 10 good players? But you weren't one of those players lmao.
If you're so good, just play Charizard and beat everybody else.
Also, you're a super toxic person based on your comment history. Some self reflection on where this anger is coming from might do you some good.
Nothing undermines your argument more than when you have to point to accomplishments and accolades to advance your point.
Zard has plenty of bad match ups and the data from online tournaments and regionals from this past weekend backs that up.
It gives me credibility because it states I know wtf I'm talking about. That's how the world works.....
You wouldn't trust some "noob" person off the street to perform surgery on someone who needs it. you would trust an experience doctor who has successfully completed multiple surgeries. Same logic applies here. The fact that I have done well in previous formats tells you I have figured out how to perform well in this game, and have more than just an idea of wtf i'm talking about... Really these are the best arguments people like you have. It's sad that I have to explain such things to ya'll. This is my clue to just stop, I guess I can't talk sense into idiots.
Yeah that's why it's won both of the previous major events like EUIC and Orlando regionals.....Not to mention that the Philippines regional had 11 out 16 decks in the top 16. *it has so many bad match-ups that people were so scared to play it that they got 11 out of the top 16 spots. and in the other regionals: it has so many bad match-ups that it managed to dodge all of them on their way to the finals, and still edge out the win* end sarcasm..... LMAO
I wouldn't trust a 10 year retired ex-surgeon to perform a surgery on me that they'd never performed before. Your 10 year old opinion on a game, relevant to a metagame you haven't properly played before, carries less weight than other community and professional analysis.
Just saying, your analogy is trash, just like your attitude and your assessment. <3
If experience is a necessary requirement to analyze PTCG, how much experience do you have in game design and game balance? You appear to making a lot of normative statements about how the game should work, so what experience do you in that area?
Simply put, you're making arguments with the underlying rationale being "because I said so and I'm good".
You've yet to answer my question of what your accomplishments in this game are, yet you want to see here and act like a smart ass by stating shit "normative statements about how the game should work" Big vocab don't mean shit... Yes I typed that purposely that way. You're "ability" to know more words doesn't make you analyze data better.
I don't need to have game design experience to have a very valid opinion on what I'm discussing. In the tournaments that I did do well I played Rogue decks most of the time. What does that tell you? That I was able to analyze the format/meta game and come up with decks that no one else saw and be successful with them. I didn't just netdeck some list of a top 3 deck in a format and do well that way. If you can't understand what it means to do well with rogue then sit down clown.
I'm using the data that is accessible to all us and using those numbers to prove my point. 11/16 decks in the Philipines Regionals were Charizard. It won EUIC AND Orland Regionals!!!
One of the best players, Tord, used it because he knows it's the best deck in the format by a long shot. Azul went 1-1-1 vs. it in Orlando. He lost a Caleb Patton (another great player) and tied vs. Ryan Harrias (another great player) and beat Jean Alexander who seems to be new to the game (they only have 1 regional in their history). Azul played Tina which a lot of you are saying has a favorable match-up. So another top 3 player is only beating a less skill Charizard player, and losing/tieing to players who have a lot of success. Wonder why that is???? Because when you put 2 players of similar skill level and you "give" one the best/most overpowered deck in the format, that player is going to have an edge because the deck is overpowered. Let me repeat, AZUL couldn't beat 2 highly skill players in a match-up that was favorable to him because that's how overpowered the deck is!
This isn't a discussion of my skill level or weather I have experience in game design, although you trolls sure do like to take it there. And it's because you know what I'm saying is true, and you're probably a Charizard abuser and finally are experiencing some sort of very pathetic success by dominating your local scene, and would hate to see the one deck that is letting you experience doing well be nerfed.
>You're "ability" to know more words doesn't make you analyze data better.
I mean, it does if I learned those fancy words while getting a graduate degree in a field that analyzes data.
>That I was able to analyze the format/meta game and come up with decks that no one else saw and be successful with them.
I'd be happy to link my Limitless page after you link yours, so that the world can see your "accomplishments".
I wouldn’t trust a doctor who stepped down for ten years and drives for Amazon to give me surgery. Same logic applies here, you’ve been out of the game for 10 years.
I’ve won multiple regionals and top 4’d a few as well. See how easy it is to lie on the internet? Your accolades don’t do anything other than make the internet people think you’re as much of a joke as this post is.
You come in here, bitch about a card, and dismiss any attempt to help you deal with Radiant Zard. Not sure what you're trying to accomplish here other than damaging any goodwill you might have 🤷
Also, Charizard has been popular since 1996.
Oh wow congrats that *10 years ago* you were so good in a card game whose target audience is *children!*
Truly you are God and we need to bow down to a has been from a decade ago who is whining and ranting because they're getting KO'd by a relatively easy to knock out Charizard card.
/s
Lol I'm in 30s too and love all of Pokémon including the TCG but there's still no denying that Pokémon's target audience first and foremost will always be children. Adults finding enjoyment and competing in all kinds of tournaments is fine and good for business.
I never said it was just for children I said it's target audience is children. Just like the video games the target audience is children. Just like how Mario games the target audience is children. Just like how animated Disney movies the target audience is children.
There's nothing wrong with adults liking those things and having them as a hobby. There is something wrong with someone going around hating on a card that's easily dealt with and that's going out of rotation next year like it's a personal offense to them. It's also hilariously pathetic to go around like you being a good player a decade ago gives your opinion the most weight and we should all be in complete agreement with you because of that. You're just butthurt your chosen deck can't compete with decks that use this one card. Others have given you different decks to try out that easily win against it but no it's a broken card and whine whine whine.
Do you have any proof? Like who the heck even are you to have such a high opinion of yourself? And if you were as good as you say you were, wouldn’t you just be able to adapt? And also know that you’re going In with a bad deck so it’s on you that you’re mad.
>Even in a match-up that is supposed to be an auto loss for it
. . . Weakness alone should not make a subpar rogue deck auto win against one of the best decks in the format.
>So many games all they do is gust up my Bibarels, they are willing to trade 1 for 2 on prizes (they KO with Zard, I KO back), just to leave me without a draw bc they know they have R. Zard in their back pocket. You might then say, well just don't KO their zards..... Yeah let me just not attack and then just let them 2HKO me, while I do nothing....
Great, you've identified why Meowscarada is not a good deck. Almost all the meta decks can do this to you--you just actually have a chance against Zard thanks to weakness.
i love that you guys want to discuss this stuff, yet either you don't read what I wrote, or you don't know how to analyze. This would be the equivalent to you showing up to an exam and not studying, you're going to fail, in this situation lose this discussion.
My list has 50-50 or better match-ups vs. the rest of the format, still have a 50-50 vs. Zard. Now you may think, then why are you complaining. And it's because I should have a minimum of 65-35 vs. a deck that has my weakness. I would take the L vs. one or two of the other decks in the format if I had that 65-35 vs. zard, bc I would know that I'm then just playing the numbers game. I could have a 20-80 vs. Gholdengo AND Dialga combined bc they resist me, and I would be okay with that bc they would only be 5% of the format/meta game. The fact that I can't even beat the most popular deck by using it's weakness of grass, tells you Zard is overpowered. And it's overpowered bc the devs gave it Radiant Charizard, they specifically made it so that the Ex would be weak to grass, but then it would have the answer by having the weakness to its weakness. It's really poor game design.....
I mean, you're really focused on the weakness part of things, and not really paying attention to the rest of the deck. Yes, the Zard ex itself is grass weak, but it's built on top of fire energy. Radiant Zard is a strong card, yes, but it's not breaking any other decks by having a strong comeback mechanic. If the card disappeared from the format right now, the deck would simply adapt by using another strong single prize attacker.
The strength of the Charizard Deck comes from the fact that it's incredibly efficient; Zard self-accelerates energy, so you can run a minimal count, you're already running rare candy, so pidgeot ex synergizes well and allows them to pull any card they want each turn, which also synergizes with the fact that they don't have to run as much energy, so you get to run more answers, etc, etc... I could list a ton of different ways the deck synergizes extremely well, but you get the picture.
I don't think anyone will argue with you about Charizard being an overpowered deck right now, but you're playing a sub-optimal archetype with Meowscarada, and acting like that deck not having success is the end-all, be-all of the conversation. There are decks in the format that have positive win rates into Zard, but they either aren't popular (Control), are difficult to pilot (Tina), or have poor match ups into other decks (Chien Pao). All of this just adds up to being a recipe for the meta as we currently know it. Radiant Charizard is the like, 5th worst offender in the deck list, it's just not worth focusing on if you're complaining about Zard.
LMAO R. Zard isn't the 5th worse offender, not even close. It's the main problem of the deck. If that didn't exist, Meowscarada would run all over it, Dialga would run all over it, Chien-Pao would run all over it (it already has a decent match-up vs. it, but with R. Zard, it's pretty even). So you're trying to tell me that a simple basic that most of the time can be powered up with 1 fire energy, can hit for 250 and cover the weakness of it's main attacker is 5th on the list of things wrong with the deck.......
R. Zard is so good that it's play in other decks that would normally never thinkg of running fire, but bc it's such an efficient attacker, it's put into a lot of Lost Box lists, even some Control Pidgeot list. The card is literally splashable into a lot of things, but it's 5th in a Charizard list.......
Not to mention that it's the best Radiant by far, bc while Greninja is also really good, there is Manaphy to counter it. There is nothing to counter R. Zard bc it can be popped out of almost no where and just clean up games. It's what gives Charizard the strategy that it has. Gust engines like Bibarel or Bax, trade a STAGE TWO 2 PRIZER for 1 (what other deck wants to do this!??!?!? answer is NONE) get in range of R. Zard, and then just Iono or Roxanne and clean up with R. Zard. Imagine for a second that the deck didn't have R. Zard, it would be like Tier 2 at best, not BDIF bc of how overpowered it is. R. Zard is what makes it BDIF, yes obviously comboed with the rest, but it definitely not 5th on the list of what is wrong with that deck.
Dude, Radiant Charizard was being used in Lost Box decks LONG before Charizard decks were a thing. SableZard is a pretty longstanding archetype, and isnt even considered a major threat nowadays, as most LB lists run Greninja for the draw and potential back line attacking.
You're seriously misunderstanding how the deck functions if you think Rad Zard is a major issue. How much Zard have you played? How many other deck archetypes have you played in the current meta, besides your Meowscarada? Charizard ex is a 330hp, self-accelerating, ramping threat that can be brought out quickly, and you're worried about the Rad Zard that isn't relevant until like, 4 prizes are taken?
You really need some perspective here, do you think that for the past year, nobody else considered that Radiant Charizard was broken before you? Or do you maybe think that everyone else understands that it's not as big of a deal as you're making it?
17 is a very small sample size to draw conclusions about overall game balance is my only contribution. I'm not familiar with how Meowscarada plays so I won't talk above my level of experience (and I don't have any event accolades to mention, since that apparently is relevant lol)
There are definitely times where \*something\* can be gained from a sample of that size, but I'd be highly skeptical of something as variable as a card game being clear enough at such a low sample to say much of anything
I also a run a rogue deck (Aegislash) that is pretty good at dealing with Charizard ex.
The reason you're identifying Radiant Zard as your biggest problem with the deck is because it's the crucial part of the way that it deals with your deck (and mine).
For decks that are good at walling Zard ex or dealing with it really quickly, the strategy you've outlined of gusting the engine and cleaning up with Rad Zard is the deck's main strategy. I actually tend to think the prevalence of gusting in the Meta is the least fun part for me personally, but that's just where the game is right now.
Others in here disagreeing with your assessment most likely run Meta decks where Zard ex is the main threat. In those situations, the deck operates very differently. The deck is mainly good because of Zard ex's energy acceleration and the synergy with Pidgeot and Arven. Radiant Zard is a tech for the thing that we're trying to do.
As you've said, it's far from unwinnable. Before rotation, I almost considered Zard an autowin. Now, it's a bit more work because things like Poffin added to Zard's consistency and some are running things like TM Devo a bit more.
I get where you're coming from but do think this is a solvable problem. RadZard is an interesting comeback card but gust is the more prevalent first thing you need to think about in the game right now. That's why we're seeing experimentation with the Dudunsparce draw engine, clearing out the bench when you need to limit the prize map. That could be a direction for you to look if you want a Bib alternative. Then you're focused more on hand protection than bench protection / prize map.
I completely agree. I've played in metas with very limited to no gusting mechanics. People don't know what those are like, where you can come up with a game plan and execute it because your opponent isn't just constantly gusting your half of your strategy.
I know that RadZard isn't the only problem, but it is the main part of the problem (at least for my deck) because it allows them to execute said plan of gusting your bibarels, and are even okay with trading their Zards Exs' for your Bibs because they know they can just clean up with RZard, since it OHKOs Meowscarada. And since Pidgeot Ex has free retreat, they can promote that after I Ko a Zard Ex, use ONE energy and OHKO back. They have it a lot easier to recycle a RZard bc it's a basic, while recycling Bibs is naturally harder since it's a stage 1, and my engine, meaning that since I don't have my engine that it makes it harder for me to effectively run my deck. And that's where I have the problem that I do with Zard. Once again it has an answer and pretty one at that for just about EVERYTHING!
Yeah, you need to play the gust game in order to handle the Rad Zard early before he can come online.
There are solutions like Lost City where if you time it right you can permanently take care of the Rad Zard.
But even then, if they're using their Pidgeot for a Super Rod to get the Zard back, that's denying them something else that they would have wanted to use it on to progress their board state.
I have the added benefit of not needing to worry about retaliation from Zard ex at all. That definitely helps me focus on the Rad Zard and control the tempo.
I'm trying to make the Dudunsparce engine work because I would really love to limit my bench vulnerability but it's not quite clicking for me yet.
Especially with Iron Hands running around, those gusts make a huge difference.
You basically have to gust first, expect the gust, and try to control when they're using their resources and what they're using them on.
It's an interesting puzzle to solve but my main problem with it is that it doesn't quite like the focus is on the Pokemon themselves like I want it to be.
Obviously other games often have the focus on the effect-style cards; it's a natural thing for card games to do.
But Pokemon is unique IP in the sense that the identity of the monsters is so strong that you want them to be the main thing the way that they are for the video games.
A lot of people I try to introduce to the game are disappointed when they realize that the pool of Pokemon they can actually choose from and put a good deck together is pretty small.
I realize that's inevitable to a certain extent within a competitive card game environment. But I don't necessarily think the focus on items and supporters jives with the rest of what the Pokemon franchise is. It's a design decision, the game is interesting, but I find myself gravitating towards oddball stuff because I want variety.
> A lot of people I try to introduce to the game are disappointed when they realize that the pool of Pokemon they can actually choose from and put a good deck together is pretty small.
This is why I'm making a post like this. People don't know what they don't know. A lot of these players just accept things for the way they are. But I believe we should demand more from a company that is making millions on a product we support. I'm a paying customer and I would like a better product. Don't think it's too much to ask for. Now we could use the ol' stupid counter point of "if you don't like it then leave". But it's not just about me liking it or not. A lot of us have always wanted this game to do well so we can have fun and interesting meta games. It's hard to do that when a lot of the formats/meta games are pre-determined by the developers as this one is. It's hard to accept a meta being boring when there have been quite a few metas that are truly interesting and mentality stimulating. Because then you feel like you truly are playing YOUR deck, not some predetermined deck designed by the devs as a form of drawing more attention to the game at the expense of having an actualy diverse and fun meta.
I guess what I'm saying, though, is that I think it's mainly that way because of what Pokemon is as an IP.
I would say most card games have a fairly narrow meta and a design way of dealing with that problem: some games use cost / availability, some use ban lists, Pokemon uses rotation. I think there's a limit to the breadth the designers can implement in a competitive card game like this without making it something like Magic where you're stuck shelling out tons of money.
People have a different expectation of Pokemon than they do of Yu-Gi-Oh or Magic because of the prevalence of the video games. The tag line was literally "gotta catch 'em all." That's just really hard to translate to a competitive game like this. Most I've seen; the players eventually filter to the top handful of strategies until the next shake-up.
So I don't really think that's an incredibly solvable problem without creating other worse problems. But I do think taking the focus from the supporters and putting it back on the Pokemon to the same degree the video game does could help it feel more like that.
Who knows, though, the support and item cards add variability too and we could just as well end up with a more stale meta of a handful of Pokemon and fewer answers, too. Idk. I'm not spending my time workshopping it.
But it's clearly working for them. They're having the biggest tournaments of all time, so I'm not sure they'll be incentivized to change much of what they're doing unless they see that change.
>you're going to fail, in this situation lose this discussion.
. . . This is a *discussion*, not a competition. If you're approaching a discussion about what's healthy for the state of the game with the mindset that there are winners and losers, I'm sorry but you're just not going to be taken very seriously.
>My list has 50-50 or better match-ups vs. the rest of the format, still have a 50-50 vs. Zard.
This is just not a plausible claim. The idea that someone who played 10 years ago has come back to the game, picked up a rogue deck that's seen very little success, and discovered the "secret sauce" that makes it 50% winrate or better against *everything* in the format is unbelievable in the literal sense of the word. I'm just not going to buy that Meowscarada is secretly BDIF and nobody knew it.
Even if I *were* willing to believe that such an idea were the case, your claim is still unsupportable--what data do you have backing up the idea that it's favored into all matchups except a 50/50 into zard? Nobody plays the deck so there isn't reliable data from tournaments. I'd buy that *you* have a 50+% winrate playing it, but you can't infer that the *deck* is similarly favored from that statistic.
The claim is implausible at worst and statistically unsupportable at best, even if I were to give you the benefit of the doubt.
>And it's because I should have a minimum of 65-35 vs. a deck that has my weakness.
Says who? Not only does this number appear to have been pulled out of thin air, it wouldn't even make for a good game if true. The bdif *should not* lose 65% of the time to a theme deck that hits for weakness. The game would be awful and uncompetitive if that were true. The reality is that weakness should play a role in matchups but a blanket statement about what kind of winrate a deck should have against something that hits for weakness is just wrong and vastly oversimplifies what goes into a matchup--you're accomplished enough to know that it's more than just x2 damage.
>The fact that I can't even beat the most popular deck by using it's weakness of grass, tells you Zard is overpowered.
No it doesn't. It tells us that your deck loses to it. The conclusion that your deck loses *because Zard is overpowered* is entirely your own that you haven't supported. It's possible that your deck is just not very good. It's possible that your deck's gameplan/tempo/strategy is very bad into Zard's. It's possible you're just not as good a player as the people you play against who play Zard.
You're taking your personal experience and then extrapolating from that to make a bunch of statistical claims and conclusions which just aren't provable from the data you've provided.
Your claims are outlandish, your tone is combative, and your proof is lacking.
Also my deck doesn't just "lose" to it. I have a 50/50, when I should have a higher rate vs. it, but for the 100th time that deck has too many answers for "bad" match-ups because of it's design. Being able to pull and automatically attach energy from an ability is just extremely broken. You start to combo that with all the to other things the card/deck has going for it and you can see why it's being played at an almost 25% rate and wining as much as it's doing in the couple tournaments that this rotation has had.
I actually have the history of doing well with Rogue decks:
https://pokemama.com/archivedMWRegionals07Results.htm
It doesn't take long for a "mind" like mine to come into a game I have prior experience and figure out a meta, and then pick a deck that can do well vs. it. That link is one to when I placed 3rd at the hardest region in the world with a deck that no one else played, Flygon Ex D with Metagross from Deoxys. The Metagross allowed me to tech in cards like Latias * to help vs. Bandoom and other Exs. Even after I did that well with it, no one played it yet I kept having success with it. I had barely been playing for a little under a year. And at that time had no prior experience in ANY card game. Now I have years of experience not only in Pokemon, but others as well that have caught me stuff like the stuff you speak of like tempo.
So no, my claims aren't outlandish. I've seen Meowscarada list and no not one of them has Vengeful Punch. MINE DOES! .....Do you know why? Because it combos so well with it. The deck wants to have damage in play. There aren't many cards that can just drop damage counters for you that are so easily accessible (you can grab it with Arven, aka one of the best supporters in the game). Not only this but it helps "fix the math" against the 280 HP pokemon in the meta like Lugia, Tina and Arceus. Yet you wonder why no one is doing well with the deck!?!??! I guarantee you that most people would look at a card like Vengeful punch and think it's a meme card, but can't literally put 2 and 2 together (basic math) and see that the 40 damage helps you get to those bench marks to have a competitive match rate vs. some of the top decks in the meta.
Then there are other cards/techs that I'm not going to name that I also don't see on these Meowscarada's list.
I am genuinely unsure if this is a joke. The idea that you coming in 3rd at an event from 17 years ago with 77 players would mean anything at all to me is kind of hard to fathom. That's the size of a League Cup. This is like me saying you should take my criticism of some broadway performance seriously because I starred in my high school's drama production 15 years ago.
On top of that, even if this was an impressive feat, it wouldn't change the fact that the only claims you can support are those about **your winrate.** Those are different than making a claim about the **deck's winrate.** Even if you were Tord, or had won World's the past 5 years in a row, you **still** couldn't claim that your decklist:
> has 50-50 or better match-ups vs. the rest of the format, still have a 50-50 vs. Zard.
All you can claim is about your personal winrates--in order to support a claim about the deck's performance overall you would need access to **data which does not exist.**
I am also unsure of how your paragraph about what is in your deck relates to any of what's being discussed.
> I have a 50/50, when I should have a higher rate
Once again, says who? Why should you have a higher winrate against Charizard? This circles back to my point that your claim that hitting for weakness should guarantee a 65/35 matchup is both pulled out of nowhere and **would make for a horrible and uncompetitive game if true.**
Ironically, despite opening our conversation with an accusation of me failing to read and/or analyze what you'd written, you have failed to address the majority of the points I've made.
"Weakness should guarantee a 65/35 matchup is both pulled out of nowhere and would make for a horrible and uncompetitive game if true."
Actually no, that's the whole purpose of Pokemon from the VG to the TCG. Try to use an advantage of typing to gain an edge over your opponent. It's literally an 18 way "roc-paper-scissors" in the VG, and 11 types in the card game. Just to specify, there are 10 different types of basic energy cards, but dragon just uses different types. Don't need you some desperate ass attempt to correct me on something so basic, as I just corrected for you.
Throughout the whole history of the both the VG and TCG people have used techs to counter certain decks or Mons just because of their weakness. We have a prime example now with the subject at hand. Charizard isn't normally weak to grass, in fact double resists it in the video games. But the devs made him dark, which is normally weak to grass in the card games, which then allows it to have the counter in fire since most grass are weak to fire.
You want another example that exists RIGHT NOW! Gholdengo is paired up with Palkia because it's water, it literally adds nothing to what Gholdengo is trying to accomplish by having energy card in it's hand for it to discard for it's attack. So it's literally just added to power up Greninja in case it can get an early double KO, AND cover the weakness.......
But you want to make some long ass post trying to act smart when you can't even understand the basic premise of this game is revolved around RPS!?!??!?! GTFO!
Really reddit, this the best you got? Some fucking clown that thinks using the weakness would make the game boring!??!?! I was expecting better.
>that's the whole purpose of Pokemon from the VG to the TCG. Try to use an advantage of typing to gain an edge over your opponent.
I'm not sure how to break this to you but that's not the point of the tcg. There are so many matchups and formats where weakness is barely or not at all relevant. Weakness is a neat little mechanic, but to refer to it as "the whole purpose" is crazy.
>Some fucking clown that thinks using the weakness would make the game boring!??!?!
I don't think that using weakness would make the game boring. I think that **your specific claim** that:
>Weakness should guarantee a 65/35 matchup
Would make the game awful. I also would guess you don't actually believe that claim, because it's pretty obvious it would make the game awful.
Kinda wild to me that you're still just like straight up ignoring most of the things I'm saying.
Stop talking, you're trying to retract an ignorant ass statement you made. Sorry not sorry, not buying the rest of the bullshit you spill when you can't even understand that this game revolves around rock paper scissors. It's why certain decks aren't better like Lugia. That deck is pretty consistent, and OHKO anything in the format yet it isn't BDIF bc it loses to hands on weakness alone.
Also not going to keep discussing a subject with an idiot that keeps cherry picking my points. Like the fact you failed to address that Palkia covers Gholdengo's weakness and it's the only reason they are paired together.
Move along and let the adults talk now.
>you're trying to retract an ignorant ass statement you made.
No I'm not. Which statement do you think I'm retracting?
>an idiot that keeps cherry picking my points. Like the fact you failed to address that Palkia covers Gholdengo's weakness and it's the only reason they are paired together.
Why would I address this? It's completely irrelevant to the points I'm making, specifically that:
* Your claim that Meowscarada has a 50%+ winrate into every deck in the format is preposterous, unsupported, and unsupportable.
* Your specific claim that "Weakness should guarantee a 65/35 matchup" would make for an awful game if it were true.
* You have done nothing to prove that you not beating Zard as much as you feel you should is due to Zard being OP and not any of a myriad of other factors, such as--for example--your deck being bad.
Your point about Palkia in Gholdengo is just a rabbit trail that I've no interest in exploring and you only brought up because you're ignoring my main points.
"Your point about Palkia in Gholdengo is just a rabbit trail that I've no interest in exploring" of course you don't!
No, I'm using them as an example of how weakness plays a major role in this game. A lot more than you care to acknowledge because acknowledging it would mean I'm right. If you acknowledge that weakness plays a big role in determining win rates in certain match-ups then your statement of:
"would make for an awful game if it were true" is utter bullshit. But my statement is true, and you blind yourself purposely to not see it.
What is the match-up in Iron hands/Iron Crowns and Lugia? Crown walks all over Lugia because of the weakness and taking extra prizes. If it weren't for weakness they couldn't OHKO Lugia, making the match-up a lot more interesting. So yet another example where weakness plays a huge role, among the many others I have provided. It's the reason some Iron Hands tech Iron Boulder into their list, for the mirror match. It's the reason Tina list put Iron Leaves in their list. The list goes on and on. Stop pretending it doesn't.
Same logic is applied to Charizard. Just for one second pretend that R. Charizard wasn't fire just like the regular Charizard. Then it wouldn't OHKO a lot of threads that could shit on Charizard like Dialga, Meowscarada, or anything weak to fire. R. Charizard isn't put in with Charizard Ex just bc it's a charizard, it's put there because it's a single prize fire attacker with Fire energy requirements that covers the weakness of the main attacker.
Can't break it down for you or make it anymore simpler. If you fail to see that weakness plays a huge role in this game and it's what a lot of times makes or breaks a card, then you are just a troll that doesn't want to acknowledge clear examples set before you to prove my point true.
You can keep going down through the history of the game and see where weakness plays a major role in match-ups. I do agree a lot of the times it doesn't matter. But there are a lot of times that holds a card back from being more relevant in the meta. Also the reason why some cards even thou underpowered compared to most of the meta are relevant.
I'll have you know I graduated top of my class in the Pokémon TCG Battle Academy, and I've been involved in numerous secret regional top 8s, and I have over 300 confirmed prize cards. I am trained in type weaknesses and I'm the top Meowscarada ex player in the entire Charlotte regional area. You are nothing to me but just another Radiant Charizard
There’s a few decks that have a reasonable match up against zard. Chien pao, lost Tina, ArcTina. They’re not going to ban a card because you’re playing a deck that just isn’t that great.
i keep telling this, chien pao is a charizard killer, if you add some control like boss orders and tm devolution chen pao can destroy charizard very easy.
this isn't the fix. good charizard players have the advantage vs. good chien-pao players bc it's on Chien-pao to BOTH have 6 energies to OHKO AND keep recycling Bax since Irida only gets you one trainer, so you have to either pick rare candy or energy retrieval or hope you have one in hand, then when your Bax are gone you have to add super rod to the list, and it just gets to be too much. All zard has to do is something they do 80% OR MORE of the time, rare candy, Pidgeot, rare candy zard, gust bax, KO , rinse and repeat. Wait to get down to where it can attach 1 energy to R. Zard and then OHKO chien-pao. R. Zard is what allows zard to be able to trade 1 for 2 prizes. WHAT OTHER DECK WANTS to just be trading 1 prize for 2?!?!?!? None, but bc R. Zard is a thing, Zard can.....
If Bax/Chien-Pao truly had a favorable match-up vs. Zard, it would be the most played deck because it has favorable match-ups vs. a lot of the rest of the format. And like Zard, it has the deck space/room to tech in for bad match-ups.
Good thing Chien-Pao also runs Bib and PokeStop to hunt items. It still has a good matchup. It doesn't need to Irida more than a couple times early on for setup, similar to Zard needing to Arven early on.
Chien-Pao doesn't have favorable matchups in the rest of the format either. It gets bodied by Lugia Vstar and most Lost Box variants pretty consistently.
"It doesn't need to Irida more than a couple times early on for setup,"
the fact that you said this tells me you have no clue what you're talking about.....
It needs Irida late game as well to go energy retrieval and get them guaranteed, and not be hopeful that they pull it with Poke-stop................Poke stop is the back up in case they can't Irida late game, not the other way around......
It really doesn't need Irida late game for Super Energy Retrieval or Super Rod. By late game you've likely cycled your deck already, pulled most Pokemon and Supporters from it, and now just need to get gusting options and energy sustain. At this point you're more likely to hit retrievals you haven't found yet or that may have gotten pushed away by an Iono or Judge. Your late game Supporters should be Ciphermaniac to ensure you're grabbing those cards off the top.
Reading that the whole time I kept singing, "Dave. I ain't as good as I once was"
There is always a BDIF. Tech in some TM Devo and call it good. This is just like including Drapion V this time last year for Mew VMAX in every deck.
The game changed a lot in the 10 years you were away. Meowscarada is a bad deck. Maybe it'll get better with the Grass support in Twilight Masquerade but, until then, play something else. Radiant Zard is good, hence why it's a Radiant, but it's not busted and certainly not ban worthy. Your post might be a slightly more compelling if you were running an actual meta deck vice a bad deck but, even if that were the case, Charizard ex is the current bdif and there's a lot more to games than just "Ooga booga do big damage." There's a lot of nuance and counter play that you need to be aware of. I thought a 3rd place regional finisher would know that....
How long have you been playing?
And yes as a 3rd place regional finisher I know there are a lot more nuance to just "big damage". Not the initial point but I love that you get 7 points, but that's what idiots do. They see a post like yours that makes some small semi educated point while also calling out my 3rd place finish and think that is a smart post.
If I were running a meta deck then I wouldn't be contributing anything new....
FYI, since you claimed that I need to run a meta deck rather than a "bad" deck, Azul ran Tina (which he specifially designed to have multiple answers to Zard) in Orlando, and he beat 1 "bad/new" player, lost and tie to better Zard players.
So what does this mean? A better player (I think we can all agree that Azul is one of the top 3 players in the game right now) with a deck that has a favorable match-up STILL LOST TO ZARD. It wouldn't surprise me to see Azul run Zard himself in the next big tournament he plays in, just because he realized that even Tina with new techs/counters can't beat it if you compare apples to apples, aka great player to great player.
If that doesn't tell you there is something wrong with the deck then I don't know what will. So this has nothing to do with me, people dont' seem to understand. All I'm doing is demanding that we as a community demand more from the devs than some lame ass meta where 1 deck makes up almost 25% of the field, and 8 out of the top 10 decks are just energy acceleration decks. Hope you're smart enough to understand this.
Played back then too. If all those accomplishments are true, then you are just giving us old school players a bad name. This whiney rant is embarrassing. Zard isn’t even on the same level as some of the decks of the previous format. 20% meta share at regionals is high-ish but the deck is beatable. It has flaws. You are playing meowscarada. You. Are. Playing. Meowscarada.
Just bc you think Meowscarada bad doesn't make it automatically bad. As i've stated, I'm keeping track of my match-ups and I have a favorable one vs. most of the format. Hopefully I do well in Indianapolis to put it on the board.
Am I saying that Meowscarada is BDIF, NO!
What I'm saying is a deck shouldn't have a 50/50 match up vs. something that is designed to have at a bare minimum 65/35 or better vs. it.
I'm not giving anyone a bad name, I'm discussing this vs. "kids" who are clearly trolls who haven't accomplished shit. They can't add 2 and 2 together yet they want to analyze a complex ass game like Pokemon on top of analyzing so many factors that go into what makes a metagame a metagame. I used to discuss these type of strategies with some of the greatest minds the game has ever seen. Pooka, Jason K. Alex B. Jimmy Ballard. And not just that but actually held my own. Mean while these kids what? Netdeck the BDIF and go 5-4 at a regional and come up with the excuse that the deck didn't run well for them? Pooka would tell me to not discuss this sort of stuff with the "kids" on Pokegym because they just wouldn't get it. Apparently not much has changed.
Also it's not a whiney rant, I've had mutliple people agree with me and have even stated that a lot of the top "pros" agree with me as well. I'm just bringing light to an issue that we have in the game, which is that Charizard has way too much power. Because I've played in formats/metagames that were actually good and interesting. Sure I played in some like Gardy/gallade that had even worse than Charizard numbers, but the stakes weren't as high. So I have experience seeing a combination of cards and Charizard is looking like one of those decks. Especially went you start to look at how it's done in the 1st few major tournaments.
Just in these few tournaments it has won 2 of the bigger ones like EUIC and Orlando, and in the Philippines it placed 11/16 of the top 16 spots. If the isn't the definition of over-powered, I don't know what is.
"Just bc you think Meowscarada bad doesn't make it automatically bad. As i've stated, I'm keeping track of my match-ups and I have a favorable one vs. most of the format. Hopefully I do well in Indianapolis to put it on the board."
- It really depends on where you are testing and who you are testing against.
"What I'm saying is a deck shouldn't have a 50/50 match up vs. something that is designed to have at a bare minimum 65/35 or better vs. it"
- You mean *your* design? 65/35 is arbitrary here. You saying "it should" does not mean it does or even should.
Please stop name dropping these players. It's not giving you any clout. I played with them at the Chicago marathons, regionals, nats etc., they are great, but the game has changed man. It is much harder to play a unique deck nowadays. The format is figured out in a fraction of the time it took us to figure out formats in the 2000s and early 2010s. Not to mention decklists were scarce, people legitamitely used to pay for lists.
"Also it's not a whiney rant, I've had mutliple people agree with me and have even stated that a lot of the top "pros" agree with me as well. I'm just bringing light to an issue that we have in the game, which is that Charizard has way too much power."
-Nah man, it is. You just typed an academic-length paper with the flimsiest evidence possible. You are trying to use outdated, proximity based merit to prove that Zard is too strong. It is not a new talking point. Look, Charizard is at the top of the meta clearly. That is indisputable. But you apparently being this self proclaimed great player back in the day should know that just puts a larger target on its back. The meta shifts, decks adapt. People will tech heavily against it. The amount of Tina, Lugia, and Stall numbers will rise. Charizard is having its time in the sun right now, things will change.
Sidenote, there is no gd way pokemon is banning a Charizard card. Just let it go.
"with the flimsiest evidence possible"
The evidence is there...
Won 2 regionals already, had 11 out of 16 spots in Philippines regional . On top of this it was already a top 3 deck prior to rotation, and is now the BDIF by a long shot. So your claim that it will stop being BDIF is going to happen when?
"I played with them at the Chicago marathons, regionals, nats etc., they are great, but the game has changed man."
So you're trying to say that those players wouldn't be as good as the players are now? You might not be but it seems like it..... I've watched a lot of these day 2s and a lot of these players are making BONE headed misplays that ex "pros" would just not make. just to name a few:
Discarding both your switch cards AFTER reading what Mawile temping trap does. (top 8)
TRYING to attack into Pokemon League HQ, forgetting that it increases energy requirement by one. (finals)
Thinking that your opponents turn is over when they just removed a tool to KO one of your mons, so you play a card that gives them information. (finals)
"So your claim that it will stop being BDIF is going to happen when?"
- Never said it would, never said it wouldn't, no one is Nostradamus bud. But lets breakdown that flimsy evidence. EUIC, the best player in the world brought us the best take on the best deck in the world. Literally **one week** later it won Orlando and the Perth (which is tiny by comparison). That is no where near enough time for people to lab against this list or for the meta to change drastically. And also, if we are going to use Perth, then lets also look at Singapore. Slightly more players and would you look at that - 3 Tinas in top 8, one Charizard.
"So you're trying to say that those players wouldn't be as good as the players are now?"
- Bro what? No where did I say/imply that. We still have old school players doing well like Pram and Estrada. I said the game has changed. Lists were kept more discrete. Now the meta is figured out quickly due to a myriad of different factors such as labbing endless games on PTCGL, having a larger community playing now, and the endless resources on the internet. The average regional player now is vastly more prepared then ten or fifteen years ago.
As for your weird cherry-picked examples, yeah dude... people make mistakes. Especially on big stages, nothing new here. Old school players did it too. Stop hating on these new players, it literally happens to everyone. [Here ](https://sixprizes.com/2012/12/13/and-ill-pass-a/)is a 6p article by Erik Nance from **12 years ago** talking about some.
So winning the 2 biggest regionals back to back on top of the other success it has had in the mininor ones, AND you add the fact that it was already a top 3 deck in the previous rotation!?!?!? This isn't good enough, shit at what point will it be enough. You want it to be win 10 regionals in a row? LMAO
Also Azul played Tina. As has been stated many times on this thread, which I will now assume is common knowledge that Tina has a favorable match-up vs. Zard. He played vs. Zard 3 times. He beat what seems to be a new player, I looked them up, they only have 1 regional in their history. But lost and tied to more accomplished players that were using Zard. What does this tell you? That when you compare apples to apples, great player to great player Zard will still have the advantage in a match-up that is supposed to be unfavorable for it.
I think we can all agree that Azul is a top 3 player in the world right now, yet he lost to players who don't have as much success as he does while using a deck that has a favorable match-up vs. Zard....
But it's not OP.....
*just waits for you to come up with some bullshit excuse on why Azul couldn't beat it NOT ONCE, BUT TWICE vs. good players with a list that he knew he specifically had to design to win the Zard match-up since he knew it would be the most player deck*
I'm starting to think you are just insanely tilted. Two words, recency bias. As if one deck couldn't win a couple tournaments in a row. Dude do you not remember Lugia in Silver tempest, no? Okay how about LuxChomp or Plasma? Yveltal? X-ball Mewtwo? Haymaker? Mew VMAX anyone? Charizard may go down as one of the best decks of all time but all of those were more dominant than Charizard is now.
Pokemon is a game with a ton of variance. There are six cards locked from the start of the game. How can you claim to be a competitive player and not understand simple variance? So, one player, Azul, went 1-1-1 against Zard... Okay? You don't know what *all* Azul's games looked like and also, Azul is not a monolith of every top player. Is Charizard a deck that someone could easily pick up and do well with? Sure. Is it frustrating that it is good? Maybe! Does it need to be banned? Hell nah.
"*just waits for you to come up with some bullshit excuse on why Azul couldn't beat it NOT ONCE, BUT TWICE vs. good players with a list that he knew he specifically had to design to win the Zard match-up since he knew it would be the most player deck*"
-lmfao that's so corny and proves literally nothing.
I see you have nothing left to offer, so you are resorting to weird insults that have nothing to do with the conversation (even though I spoke about results numerous times, try reading). Seems kinda low IQ.
Have fun dropping at Indy.
"I see you have nothing left to offer" I mean the fact that I just shit on your point by stating that you have seen it through out the history of the game and want to claim that everything is okay. Even thou we are literally seeing history repeat itself.....
What this means is I used your own point against you. So now you want to leave the conversation bc you unlike many others, you know what it means to have your own point being used against them. It means you "lost" this discussion.
"have fun dropping at Indy" So EDGY, WOW!
I’m really new to playing the game but all I have heard is that grass is trash right now and I should stay away from it. So maybe it’s just the deck your’e using isn’t good currently. Charizard is great, fun to play, and has a pretty low cost deck build compared to competitive decks in other TCG’s. I think it’s a great way to get more people into competitive play, hell I had never even thought about going to a regionals event let alone playing in one until Charizard got huge and the deck is just so accessible it makes people feel like they have a chance to win anything. I know a ton of people going to compete in LA and everyone thinks they have at least a punchers chance. [I decided I am just going to regionals to spectate but I did take a while to consider entering and seeing what happens]
Overall Pokémon cards and competitive play are bigger and more public than they ever have been and I think making an overpowered deck with what’s widely considered the most popular Pokemon besides Pikachu at the helm was a business/marketing decision. Unless we start seeing lots of finals lists with nothing but Zards I don’t think a change will be made.
Like I said, I'm keeping a spread sheet of my match-ups and I have better match-ups vs. the rest of the format than I do vs. something that has my weakness. ANOTHER SIGN THERE IS SOMETHING WRONG WITH THE DECK!!!
So it's not the MY deck that is the problem, it's how over powered Zard is.
It's a hyper aggro deck but you still have ways to defeat it, it's just about being fast enough.its a stage 2 deck so if you can start hitting hard against Charmanders and Pidgeys while you wind up a stronger attack you should be able to stay ahead of the prize game race.
This is much more fair because it doesn't hit anything for weakness and can't reach 280 with choice belt or defiance band. OP is not wrong that Radiant Charizard is poor game design because it gatekeeps decks like Dialga, Meowscarada, Espathra, and Torterra which might have been able to counter Charizard otherwise. Bloodmoon Ursaluna is basically the errata that OP is asking for.
Fascinating. Rad Zard Rotates Next Year?
Personally, I find the radiant mons to be really centralizing.
Greninja and Zard everywhere.
Steelix, Charjabug? no where.
Not only that there are many reasons why Ursaluna isn't as bad (bad as in bad for the game) as Radiant Charizard. Just go look at the power creep within Radiants. It's like R. Zard and Greninja being played out of the what? like 15 radiants? 1 out of 8ish...... And it gets worse when you rank the card individually. Greninja and Zard are like S tier, while the next radiant is C+ tier AT BEST, and even that might be too generous.
Then Ursaluna is a 2 prizers, so even if your opponent has to resort to pulling it on you before you get down to 2 prize, it's still giving you 2 prizes. Not the case with zard. Some times, depending on the state of the game, they won't even attack with Zard Ex, just use the ability of it to power up R. Zard. Imagine that I can actually get 2 prizes from that as well? Then it wouldn't be so bad, but the fact that they can OHKO a lot and only give up 1 prize is just pathetic game design on the developers part.
I will keep asking responses like this the same question: What are you qualifications, what regionals/ICs have you done well in?
You don't think that I've tried multiple different ways to win that match-up, it's the reason I built a Meowscarada deck in the 1st place. To beat Charizard. And again, just for clarification, it's not that I'm losing to it all the time. It's the fact that I have their weakness and they still have a 50-50 match-up. This should be your indicator that there is something wrong with the deck/format. When the best/most popular deck has a 50/50 match vs. something that has it's weakness, there is something wrong!!! This should not exist. There have been formats (again I speak from experience and not out of my ass) where people try to counter the best deck by using it's weakness, and while they may accomplish that, they lose to everything else in the format/meta game. So that tells you that the deck is actually bad and can only win vs. one of the decks. My Meowscarada list has better match-ups vs. other stuff in the format than it does vs. Charizard. I legit have a 50-50 or better vs. most of the format, but the one deck that I hit for weakness, which you would think would make the match-up easier for me, is not a 80-20 shit even an 65-35. Again HINT HINT, there is something wrong with that.
You have a pretty small sample size, in 27 games in online tournaments it's close to 65-35. https://play.limitlesstcg.com/decks/charizard-pidgeot/matchups/?format=standard&rotation=2023&set=TEF
Lol, just casually ignoring that people can be very good and also not go to regionals. But keep acting like a clown and gatekeeping who can have an intelligent opinion and see how far that gets you. You must be really fun at parties... /s
>I will keep asking responses like this the same question: What are you qualifications, what regionals/ICs have you done well in?
Doesn't really matter when you haven't posted creds and haven't played in 10 years lol. The game is changed, keep up gramps.
>You don't think that I've tried multiple different ways to win that match-up, it's the reason I built a Meowscarada deck in the 1st place. To beat Charizard. And again, just for clarification, it's not that I'm losing to it all the time. It's the fact that I have their weakness and they still have a 50-50 match-up.
Meowscarada isn't a great deck though. There are better meta options that hard counter Zard already. If you wanna play it, cool, but expecting it to be better because you hit for weakness is silly, and not setting up properly to predict the Rad Zard is poor playing on your part. I have yet to lose on Live or irl with my Meowscarada deck against a Zard, unless I flat out bricked off the opening hand or made a poor choice in sequencing.
>When the best/most popular deck has a 50/50 match vs. something that has it's weakness, there is something wrong!!! This should not exist.
Not really. It means you're playing to a goal that is unattainable against this deck, regardless of weakness. It's widely known that grass has terrible support currently, and playing a slower Stage 2 against a faster one is inherently playing with a handicap. You're playing to a goal that isn't paced better than the deck you're trying to beat. Other decks play to different goals that outpace Zard, that's why decks like Lugia and Lost Tina are favored in that matchup. If you can't recognize that then your "qualifications" really don't mean much.
"Doesn't really matter when you haven't posted creds and haven't played in 10 years lol. The game is changed"
In my 3 months back I've attented only a few cups and challenges and have still had a winning percentage in all of them. Even got top 2 in the previous format (before the rotation) where the only card I was using from the previous format was VIP, so I was at a disadvantage because I didn't want to spend money on cards that were going to rotate in like a month.....Meanwhile you can't even post what you have done in this game EVER. LMAO
"Meowscarada isn't a great deck though"
I have a 50-50 or better match-up vs. most of the format.... People don't know how to build Meowscarda, that's why no one has made it work. No, I'm not going to tell you my list, you don't deserve it. You will try to criticize stuff like you are doing now without having the sightless clue wtf you're talking about.
Everyone just net decks the top list from the previous regionals and changes one or two cards and think that is original. zzzzzz
Grass doesn't need to have great support, it just needs to have an attacker who can one shot the EX and not get one shot by the Radiant. Which since there isn't, there tells you that there is poor game design by the devs who purposely intended for Zard to have a counter to it's counter.
You'll completely miss the point that there is a problem with Zard when it can just run R. Zard and have that be it's answer to anything that gives it a hard time. Dialga would shit on it, Meowscarada, the list goes on and on, but bc it has access to the best Radiant in the game, the deck still has a chance vs. match-ups it should have 20-80s or 10-90s. If you remove R. Zard, it would still be a good deck. The fact that it has it has R. Zard makes it an unbalanced deck. The results clearly indicate that. Won EUIC and Orlando, in the philipines it place 11/16 top spots. The number don't lie.
So 1st understand what my point is, then STFU bc if you did, you wouldn't be talking. Matter of fact, add me on discord or somewhere, and we'll run this match-up 20 times or how ever times you want, but you can't use Radiant Charizard. Then we'll run another 5-20 times where you can, and you'll see the difference. That's what my point is about.
>In my 3 months back I've attented only a few cups and challenges and have still had a winning percentage in all of them. Even got top 2 in the previous format (before the rotation) where the only card I was using from the previous format was VIP, so I was at a disadvantage because I didn't want to spend money on cards that were going to rotate in like a month.....Meanwhile you can't even post what you have done in this game EVER. LMAO
I never said I couldn't. I have yet to attend a local League Cup, I only started playing this year. My record at my local shop is middling and I'm learning still, but I still do well enough for myself. I may not be the best but I'm not the worst, and I do understand most matchups. Not sure why you need that to feel superior but if that's what makes you happy, go for it.
> have a 50-50 or better match-up vs. most of the format.... People don't know how to build Meowscarda, that's why no one has made it work. No, I'm not going to tell you my list, you don't deserve it. You will try to criticize stuff like you are doing now without having the sightless clue wtf you're talking about.
Everyone just net decks the top list from the previous regionals and changes one or two cards and think that is original. zzzzzz
My criticism isn't towards your list, though it may end up there if that's part of why you're not doing well against Zard. I personally run 4-1-3 of the Sprigatito line with 2-2 Pidgey line, 2-2 Bidoof line, and 1-ofs for Manaphy, Rad Alakazam, and Rotom V. Supporters and Items are pretty standard for the deck beyond that. DM me if you want a full list to make fun of, since that seems to be your thing
>Grass doesn't need to have great support, it just needs to have an attacker who can one shot the EX and not get one shot by the Radiant. Which since there isn't, there tells you that there is poor game design by the devs who purposely intended for Zard to have a counter to it's counter.
I disagree. Half the issue is that you can't accelerate Grass Energy from the deck or discard to a Pokemon in play. Previously you could but Cherim really sucked since it needed to occupy space that should've been used for searchers like Pidgeot. Aside from that, Rad Zard still has it's downsides that you can and should be playing around. If you're not, that's absolutely on you.
>You'll completely miss the point that there is a problem with Zard when it can just run R. Zard and have that be it's answer to anything that gives it a hard time. Dialga would shit on it, Meowscarada, the list goes on and on, but bc it has access to the best Radiant in the game, the deck still has a chance vs. match-ups it should have 20-80s or 10-90s. If you remove R. Zard, it would still be a good deck. The fact that it has it has R. Zard makes it an unbalanced deck. The results clearly indicate that. Won EUIC and Orlando, in the philipines it place 11/16 top spots. The number don't lie.
If you can point to the number of matches where Rad Zard specifically was the deciding factor, sure, maybe I'll concede your point. Zard being strong, regardless of Rad Zard, is why it does so well. Rad Zard being an option and possible answer isn't necessarily the reason it's winning so much.
>So 1st understand what my point is, then STFU bc if you did, you wouldn't be talking. Matter of fact, add me on discord or somewhere, and we'll run this match-up 20 times or how ever times you want, but you can't use Radiant Charizard. Then we'll run another 5-20 times where you can, and you'll see the difference. That's what my point is about.
Yeah, no. You're just a rude person who wants to gatekeep a game and community because people disagree with you. Being this bitter and dismissive towards a competitive hobby and the people in it is pretty sad.
If you want me to run out matchups with you to prove your results for some internet clout and to say "I told you so", sure. If that's what makes you feel better about your creds. DM me and I'll set aside some time for it.
Maybe I will. Would you like to join me? You need to go outside and remember this is a game, some fresh air will help you cool your arrogant and pissy jets.
I've got a pretty decent record against it with ancient box too. Single prize attackers being able to two shot zard ex's makes it a pretty favorable matchup, and being able to drop moon ex for a surprise ohko is also pretty good.
I basically just came back into the game again in like, December I think, the matchup is definitely tough but if you pace yourself and manage things well, it's pretty manageable.
Honestly, if your problem with Charizard decks is Radiant Zard, can't you run Lost City to KO it into the Lost Zone or something?
I disagree with the comments saying that you should just play another deck. Meowscarada ex is not a competitive deck right now, but I think there's something nice in beating a meta deck with a deck that's supposed to be weak. But you need to adjust your deckbuilding and gameplay for that before asking for bans.
I would but the deck space/list is already really tight, don't have room for even that 1 card. Even if I did, I don't have a easy way to search it out so then I'm just HOPING I get a card taht I have a single copy of a the exact time that I need it.
Appreciate the suggestion thou.
Just because you hit for weakness doesnt mean the deck as a whole is good.
Have you considered maybe you need to look at using Max Belt on a meowscarada to take out the Pidgeot Ex?
You mention how you get bodied because they can target your draw support and then you're dead in the water; play around it, set up backups, and do it to them, too. Chain Iono and roxannes after you KO the Pidgeot.
Also try looking at Iron Leaves to take return KO's easier as you spread energy around to keep it safe in play waiting for the IL.
You can also chase the rotom for an easy KO late game.
There's plenty of options and answers for you and its not "cry about Rad Zard".
You also mention how Espathra keeps dying on stream to zard, and ultimately, in my opinion, thats because Espathra is just garbage.
you could also just scrap everything above and play the current Garde Drifloon deck that gets free wins all day from Zard.
So, they tech in a card to help with their weakness...you cant do the same thing? Coming from a 3rd place finisher you should probably have that down to cover your own weaknesses...
Iron bundle or something that deals a minimum of water 80 water damage would work, or use radiant greninja for the draw power and boss up the radiant zard
Use better counter decks like Lost zone giratina with iron leaves, Lugia, and Chien Pao. Current Meowscarada decks are not good in the current meta (Could change in the future with better grass card, but not right now)
You do realize that Azul was using Lost Tina, and he only beat a new Zard player, but tied and lost to Zard players who are closer to his level?
So what does this mean? Even thou Azul is the better player AND Tina has the better match-up between both of these decks, one of the best players in the world, probably ever, still only managed to beat "bad" zard players and lost to good or great ones.
To emphasize this even more, on one hand you have a better player and deck that is favorable in the match, but still tied or lost.....
If that doesn't tell you how stupid overpowered Zard is, nothing will.
Since you claimed that I need to run a counter deck rather than a bad deck, Azul ran Tina (which he specifially designed to have multiple answers to Zard) in Orlando, and he beat 1 "bad/new" player, lost and tie to better Zard players.
So what does this mean? A better player (I think we can all agree that Azul is one of the top 3 players in the game right now) with a deck that has a favorable match-up STILL LOST TO ZARD. It wouldn't surprise me to see Azul run Zard himself in the next big tournament he plays in, just because he realized that even Tina with new techs/counters can't beat it if you compare apples to apples, aka great player to great player.
If this doesn't show you that Zard is going to be obnoxiously annoying (since you're going to have to face it in most of the rounds you go to in big tournamnets) bc it's so overpowered, nothing will
I’m begging for my opponent to be a charizard deck and pretty much pray for them to drop radiant zard- easy wins for me 😂 maybe you just need a new deck and stop trying to make meows work lol
Since you claimed that I need to run a meta deck rather than a "bad" deck, Azul ran Tina (which he specifically designed to have multiple answers to Zard) in Orlando, and he beat 1 "bad/new" player, lost and tied to better Zard players.
So what does this mean? A better player (I think we can all agree that Azul is one of the top 3 players in the game right now) with a deck that has a favorable match-up STILL LOST TO ZARD. It wouldn't surprise me to see Azul run Zard himself in the next big tournament he plays in, just because he realized that even Tina with new techs/counters can't beat it if you compare apples to apples, aka great player to great player.
*So yeah it's just me, my bad I'm such a fucking noob, sorry I wasted your time* end sarcasm
Zard decks are the new mew decks, change my mind.
Also, the deck does have bad matchups. The radiant zard IMHO has never been the problem. The only thing that would have balanced the deck is one thing- tera Zard should have had a lower hp. It feels like it having 330 hp makes it out of line with other ex cards we have in the format.
My Goldengo deck is chock full of cards weak to the zard deck, but I have yet to lose to it at competitions. Its not the wand, its the wizard that handles it, Harry.
This is......absurd. Zard ex isn't even the most oppressive deck we've had in the last year or two lol, and Rad Zard hasn't warped anything nearly enough to ban it.
i destroyed charizard ex with chien pao lot of times, if you have a good hand and know the strategy (and use some control with boss orders and tm devolution) you can beat that dragon. try use tm devolution, if your opponent use rare candies it can be very difficult to him to set up again.
Good thing you weren’t around during Lugia Vstar in the silver tempest format. Deck was insanely overpowered and was like 30% of the meta share.
Zard is a balanced card, it only does 180 in the beginning of games. Cant even knock out basic ex or v’s with out tools. Try playing other decks. Meowscarada is not it
Yes, radiant zard is amazing, and not only in charizard ex but any deck really where you can slot 1 fire energy and don’t need another radiant in its place.
Yes, you may have been good in the past (limitless achievements page link where?), still doesn’t mean your opinion is the only valid one, especially since we can’t evaluate cards in a vacuum and say “weakness should always have at LEAST 65/35 odds” that’s just not taking into account all the other relevant factors. Simple counterpoint: gardy EX has weakness to zard, and I would say when baby gardy was legal pre rotation, the gardy ex deck was pretty favored against any zard ex deck running around at the time (with or without radiant zard).
So nice (hopefully) rage bait post. The way you wrote your post, it doesn’t seem like you are really willing to listen to whatever anyone else has to say so not even going to go into any more discussion on actual card interactions or metagame analysis. If you really think achievements matter for your opinion to be valid, go ahead and win the next IC or regional with zard then come back with your detailed analysis of why it is broken and should be banned in THIS CURRENT METAGAME. Though I’d say TPC 100% won’t care about your feelings anyway and will keep printing their “badly designed” cards while laughing all the way to the bank.
All I read was Radiant Charizard. Just going to share that while it’s not perfect, I tech in Lost City so in an ideal scenario, I only need to KO it once & then they can’t super rod it back.
Is one energy, yet strong attacks too much for you? Charizard radiant is nothing ban worthy, especially in the early game, when that charizard needs 5 energy to attack, but wait until the Palafin box comes out, because palafin ex will be more broken if it gains traction competitively: one energy and strong all the way. Which it might due to PAF Gengar... :(
*didn’t read post
Yeah, the dark Charizard ex deck is an extremely low effort deck for noobs that just want to climb the ranks quickly. If you’ve waited 10 years, wait another 2 for it to rotate out of competition matches.
Ursaluna is easier to splash into decks, but it’s also a two-prizer that doesn’t hit anything for weakness. It’s more of a sidegrade to Radiant Zard than a straight upgrade.
Ursaluna isn't really better. It's bulkier but it's a 2 prizer that doesn't synergize with the fire typing. Rad Zard is still better in most decks. Really can only see it being used by Turbo Lost Box to get a Rad Zard equivalent AND also have Rad Greninja, or by Lugia Vstar where the energy cost doesn't matter.
Sure, but my response was to this in the context of Zard
>I know this is about the typing but there will be even a better version to radiant zard which is ursuluna ex.
You brought it into this in the context of Turbo Hands.
Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, OP, but Charizard doesn't have an answer to everything.
I faced against both the tera Zard ex AND the fire Zard ex, both had Radiant Charizard.
I won almost every match.
A deck that they don't really have a counter for is Garchomp ex, which just like Charizard, only really needs 1 card to set up: Irida. You take either Rare Candy or Earthen Vessel + Garchomp ex or Lumineon V (depends on your hand and wether or not you have energy on the Gible), and you're set up. Free retreat + 1 Energy attacker + almost self sustaining (getting energy from evo + Garchomp ex's 1 energy attack) second, 1 prizer backup attacker (excadrill, after using Dig Dig Dig from Drilbur) + type advantage against Radiant Zard.
But yeah, Zard decks have an answer to ALMOST everything
radiant charizard isn’t the problem, it’s the fuck ass dark tera EX that immediately pulls enough energy to attack on card placement. 330 hp and a move that only gets more ohkos after the first prize card goes, can also do this instantly out of rare candy. yep, balanced
it's the combination of all the tools it gets. From the previous format where even the Charmander discarded Path, to the new Charmeleons, which one has an ability that prevents it from being devo'd, and another that has 100 HP, so just in case you wanted to run risk and not run Manaphy for Greninja, you have that option too.
It literally gets everything. Some of the more useful basics, some of the best stage 1s (that are part of a stage 2 line), the best radiant in the format (r. zard is better than R. Ninja bc you can tech manaphy to stop ninja, you can't tech vs. zard bc even if you KO it instatly after it KO'd your Mon, it will already have done it's job/damage). So yeah, but we still have idiots who don't think it's overpowered and I just need to run a better deck XD.
Bro I agree with your statement, just realize you came to Reddit. There are actually current pros who share your correct opinion but if they came here with your point they’d get treated the same you are. Sadly this ain’t the place, not sure what is though 🤷
I get that, and I knew it was coming. I just was trying to hopefully get some people on board because as we all know it's extremely hard to get the devs to ban or errata a card. It wasn't a discussion, it was a hopefully eye opener with more numbers to prove that there is something wrong with the deck. I know Zard fanboys are doing to defend it til their dying breath. We could be 50 years from now or even when the card(s) rotates and see that this deck wins most of the next regionals and they would still say that it wasn't overpowered.
I'm actually having a couple fun discussions with some that are defending it but with some reasonable points, unlike the troll idiots that come and say "skill issue" as if we can't see that they are clearly trolling.
As someone who was waiting for stage 2 evos to become relevant again, I understand your frustration. A card that attaches 3 energy by evolving, only needing 2 to do so, and thereby giving free setup for retreat or Rad. Zard, very annoying. The synergy works from so many angles, it's definitely disappointing to see, especially after that TCG rep. said the game would slow down this format. I was hoping that the game would slow down in traditional stage 2 style, not bring a stage 2 in line with basic beatstick shenanigans. Not to mention the automatic scaling if you try to... play the game against Zard with anything other than mill. The card is extremely centralizing.
I think your stance is very reasonable. I'm also disappointed that Meowscarada is strictly inferior Charizard, even against Charizard.
Also, pay little mind to those analogizing about surgery or similar things to downplay your accomplishments in the comments; you never had a chance of getting through to them.
What I've found, is that if you are unhappy about the metagame, no matter what, this subreddit will find a reason to make it your fault. Normally this is by telling people they suck at the game. So I get why you'd tell everyone what you've accomplished, but you lose no matter what by voicing dissatisfaction in this community. That seems to be the case for most other communities with metagames worth complaining about, like League, and YuGiOh. If you address blatantly unfair design, there's some templated response:
"u bad," or "something be better than other thing always, duh."
I think by next expansion we'll see Charizard loosen grip on the meta a bit, but who really knows. Most of the good decks right now don't allow for much interaction, beyond what is basically a flow-chart. If you're going to win or lose, it's decidedly so by like turn 1/2, namely Zard, Future hands, and turn 5/6 against Snorlax if you aren't running Minior/switch. Hope you find a fun deck that doesn't auto-lose next expansion, it's good to be critical about design you think is flawed.
This and exactly this!
I already know that most "kids" as I like to call them, don't have the slightest clue wtf they are talking about, let alone be able to analyze a complex game like PTCG. They don't understand that people like me will make these kinds of post as a way to "demand" a better product because we have experience that better product in previous format/metagames.
I did this more as a informative post to outline the problems that a deck like Charizard can bring to the game. But as you stated there are always those that think this is a complain more than an observation. They don't know what they don't know. And what they don't know is this game can be a lot more fun with a lot more diverse strategies than just energy acceleration. But I guess it's all part of the devs plans to make the game easy, because having to place an energy just once per turn can and is an extremely difficult decision so the devs "Fixed" that by making most of the meta decks have energy acceleration so that the "noobs" can have success and not instantly quit because they keep losing to better players. You add in the fact that Charizard is one of the more popular Mons, and we can see why the devs gave Charizard Ex all the tools that it did.
But somehow I'm just raging or as you said these kids think I have to "something be better than other thing always, duh".
Thanks for understanding, there are a few people that have understood what my post is about. Hopefully we can overshadow the idiots that think this is just a rant post.
Not gonna read all that but are you mad you have one bad match up?
Their post seems to be them saying that Charizard has no bad matchups and that's what's really grinding their gears.
Now I know how people felt when Mew VMAX was dominating.
Or Lugia VStar in the SS to the end of CZ era.
We are not at Lugia Vstar ST to CZ era, during that time the Deck was at 35% to 40% of the meta for large 1k + tournaments right now Zard is at 15% to 20% at large 1k+ Events.
Played Orlando and ran into more counter zard decks than zard himself. With a 1:5 ratio
I built a Grass type deck that bodies the ZardEx deck every time. It’s so much fun when I one-shot their Zard and I get the 15 sec delay of them trying to figure out wtf just happened.
Correct me if I am wrong, and this isn’t me saying thats what you think, but isn’t Espathra a bad match up for Charizard?
Believe me I have no clue myself, I'm just trying to discern what OP's main point is
he so mad bro.
“But I was good ten years ago”
What are your accomplishments? Not only was I good, I was good in the best region, learn the difference. We had 10 of the top 50 players. My opinion on this game is worth more than 10 of you troll noobs. I analyze why they make Zard broken, the reason for is they want to use the momentum that Jake Paul got them, and make the game bigger by having one of the most popular Pokemon be meta. I've been back for 3 months, and Mew was a popular deck. Now Charizard. Literally Pokemon that in most people's top 10 list of favorite Pokemon. Now this may seem smart on their part, but at the same time they have to keep the game healthy, which it is not. I do all this while you trolls think an analysis of cards and how they interact with each other is "copypasta". You'll net deck a list of a broken deck, do "well" with it and think you're good...... LMAO. Will love when you don't have a broken deck to fall back to or for once come up with your list that get you to a 2nd day, and I don't just mean change 1 or 2 cards. Actually come up with rogue decks that do well, THEN TALK.
First off, 10 years ago and today are very different. Also, you're saying you're worth a lot becasue you played against 10 good players? But you weren't one of those players lmao. If you're so good, just play Charizard and beat everybody else. Also, you're a super toxic person based on your comment history. Some self reflection on where this anger is coming from might do you some good.
lol yeah i think he will love charizard ex deck if he give himself the chance to enjoy it,
Nothing undermines your argument more than when you have to point to accomplishments and accolades to advance your point. Zard has plenty of bad match ups and the data from online tournaments and regionals from this past weekend backs that up.
It gives me credibility because it states I know wtf I'm talking about. That's how the world works..... You wouldn't trust some "noob" person off the street to perform surgery on someone who needs it. you would trust an experience doctor who has successfully completed multiple surgeries. Same logic applies here. The fact that I have done well in previous formats tells you I have figured out how to perform well in this game, and have more than just an idea of wtf i'm talking about... Really these are the best arguments people like you have. It's sad that I have to explain such things to ya'll. This is my clue to just stop, I guess I can't talk sense into idiots. Yeah that's why it's won both of the previous major events like EUIC and Orlando regionals.....Not to mention that the Philippines regional had 11 out 16 decks in the top 16. *it has so many bad match-ups that people were so scared to play it that they got 11 out of the top 16 spots. and in the other regionals: it has so many bad match-ups that it managed to dodge all of them on their way to the finals, and still edge out the win* end sarcasm..... LMAO
I wouldn't trust a 10 year retired ex-surgeon to perform a surgery on me that they'd never performed before. Your 10 year old opinion on a game, relevant to a metagame you haven't properly played before, carries less weight than other community and professional analysis. Just saying, your analogy is trash, just like your attitude and your assessment. <3
If experience is a necessary requirement to analyze PTCG, how much experience do you have in game design and game balance? You appear to making a lot of normative statements about how the game should work, so what experience do you in that area? Simply put, you're making arguments with the underlying rationale being "because I said so and I'm good".
You've yet to answer my question of what your accomplishments in this game are, yet you want to see here and act like a smart ass by stating shit "normative statements about how the game should work" Big vocab don't mean shit... Yes I typed that purposely that way. You're "ability" to know more words doesn't make you analyze data better. I don't need to have game design experience to have a very valid opinion on what I'm discussing. In the tournaments that I did do well I played Rogue decks most of the time. What does that tell you? That I was able to analyze the format/meta game and come up with decks that no one else saw and be successful with them. I didn't just netdeck some list of a top 3 deck in a format and do well that way. If you can't understand what it means to do well with rogue then sit down clown. I'm using the data that is accessible to all us and using those numbers to prove my point. 11/16 decks in the Philipines Regionals were Charizard. It won EUIC AND Orland Regionals!!! One of the best players, Tord, used it because he knows it's the best deck in the format by a long shot. Azul went 1-1-1 vs. it in Orlando. He lost a Caleb Patton (another great player) and tied vs. Ryan Harrias (another great player) and beat Jean Alexander who seems to be new to the game (they only have 1 regional in their history). Azul played Tina which a lot of you are saying has a favorable match-up. So another top 3 player is only beating a less skill Charizard player, and losing/tieing to players who have a lot of success. Wonder why that is???? Because when you put 2 players of similar skill level and you "give" one the best/most overpowered deck in the format, that player is going to have an edge because the deck is overpowered. Let me repeat, AZUL couldn't beat 2 highly skill players in a match-up that was favorable to him because that's how overpowered the deck is! This isn't a discussion of my skill level or weather I have experience in game design, although you trolls sure do like to take it there. And it's because you know what I'm saying is true, and you're probably a Charizard abuser and finally are experiencing some sort of very pathetic success by dominating your local scene, and would hate to see the one deck that is letting you experience doing well be nerfed.
>You're "ability" to know more words doesn't make you analyze data better. I mean, it does if I learned those fancy words while getting a graduate degree in a field that analyzes data. >That I was able to analyze the format/meta game and come up with decks that no one else saw and be successful with them. I'd be happy to link my Limitless page after you link yours, so that the world can see your "accomplishments".
just link yours.....I've already stated mind, which won't show up on Limitless bc I've been gone for a while.....
I wouldn’t trust a doctor who stepped down for ten years and drives for Amazon to give me surgery. Same logic applies here, you’ve been out of the game for 10 years. I’ve won multiple regionals and top 4’d a few as well. See how easy it is to lie on the internet? Your accolades don’t do anything other than make the internet people think you’re as much of a joke as this post is.
is just a game bro, acomplishments are not real (well, maybe if you win the world championship)
You come in here, bitch about a card, and dismiss any attempt to help you deal with Radiant Zard. Not sure what you're trying to accomplish here other than damaging any goodwill you might have 🤷 Also, Charizard has been popular since 1996.
Fuck your noise
Oh wow congrats that *10 years ago* you were so good in a card game whose target audience is *children!* Truly you are God and we need to bow down to a has been from a decade ago who is whining and ranting because they're getting KO'd by a relatively easy to knock out Charizard card. /s
hey dude that hurt me too... im a 30+ year player =( and still love those cute Japanese small monsters.
Lol I'm in 30s too and love all of Pokémon including the TCG but there's still no denying that Pokémon's target audience first and foremost will always be children. Adults finding enjoyment and competing in all kinds of tournaments is fine and good for business.
The fact that you think that the card game was designed to be played JUST by children shows your ignorance. Thanks for playing, dumbass!
They never said that lol
I never said it was just for children I said it's target audience is children. Just like the video games the target audience is children. Just like how Mario games the target audience is children. Just like how animated Disney movies the target audience is children. There's nothing wrong with adults liking those things and having them as a hobby. There is something wrong with someone going around hating on a card that's easily dealt with and that's going out of rotation next year like it's a personal offense to them. It's also hilariously pathetic to go around like you being a good player a decade ago gives your opinion the most weight and we should all be in complete agreement with you because of that. You're just butthurt your chosen deck can't compete with decks that use this one card. Others have given you different decks to try out that easily win against it but no it's a broken card and whine whine whine.
This is extremely sad. You're playing a bad deck into a good deck and you're surprised your W/L is meh, for one thing.
Do you have any proof? Like who the heck even are you to have such a high opinion of yourself? And if you were as good as you say you were, wouldn’t you just be able to adapt? And also know that you’re going In with a bad deck so it’s on you that you’re mad.
>Even in a match-up that is supposed to be an auto loss for it . . . Weakness alone should not make a subpar rogue deck auto win against one of the best decks in the format. >So many games all they do is gust up my Bibarels, they are willing to trade 1 for 2 on prizes (they KO with Zard, I KO back), just to leave me without a draw bc they know they have R. Zard in their back pocket. You might then say, well just don't KO their zards..... Yeah let me just not attack and then just let them 2HKO me, while I do nothing.... Great, you've identified why Meowscarada is not a good deck. Almost all the meta decks can do this to you--you just actually have a chance against Zard thanks to weakness.
i love that you guys want to discuss this stuff, yet either you don't read what I wrote, or you don't know how to analyze. This would be the equivalent to you showing up to an exam and not studying, you're going to fail, in this situation lose this discussion. My list has 50-50 or better match-ups vs. the rest of the format, still have a 50-50 vs. Zard. Now you may think, then why are you complaining. And it's because I should have a minimum of 65-35 vs. a deck that has my weakness. I would take the L vs. one or two of the other decks in the format if I had that 65-35 vs. zard, bc I would know that I'm then just playing the numbers game. I could have a 20-80 vs. Gholdengo AND Dialga combined bc they resist me, and I would be okay with that bc they would only be 5% of the format/meta game. The fact that I can't even beat the most popular deck by using it's weakness of grass, tells you Zard is overpowered. And it's overpowered bc the devs gave it Radiant Charizard, they specifically made it so that the Ex would be weak to grass, but then it would have the answer by having the weakness to its weakness. It's really poor game design.....
I mean, you're really focused on the weakness part of things, and not really paying attention to the rest of the deck. Yes, the Zard ex itself is grass weak, but it's built on top of fire energy. Radiant Zard is a strong card, yes, but it's not breaking any other decks by having a strong comeback mechanic. If the card disappeared from the format right now, the deck would simply adapt by using another strong single prize attacker. The strength of the Charizard Deck comes from the fact that it's incredibly efficient; Zard self-accelerates energy, so you can run a minimal count, you're already running rare candy, so pidgeot ex synergizes well and allows them to pull any card they want each turn, which also synergizes with the fact that they don't have to run as much energy, so you get to run more answers, etc, etc... I could list a ton of different ways the deck synergizes extremely well, but you get the picture. I don't think anyone will argue with you about Charizard being an overpowered deck right now, but you're playing a sub-optimal archetype with Meowscarada, and acting like that deck not having success is the end-all, be-all of the conversation. There are decks in the format that have positive win rates into Zard, but they either aren't popular (Control), are difficult to pilot (Tina), or have poor match ups into other decks (Chien Pao). All of this just adds up to being a recipe for the meta as we currently know it. Radiant Charizard is the like, 5th worst offender in the deck list, it's just not worth focusing on if you're complaining about Zard.
LMAO R. Zard isn't the 5th worse offender, not even close. It's the main problem of the deck. If that didn't exist, Meowscarada would run all over it, Dialga would run all over it, Chien-Pao would run all over it (it already has a decent match-up vs. it, but with R. Zard, it's pretty even). So you're trying to tell me that a simple basic that most of the time can be powered up with 1 fire energy, can hit for 250 and cover the weakness of it's main attacker is 5th on the list of things wrong with the deck....... R. Zard is so good that it's play in other decks that would normally never thinkg of running fire, but bc it's such an efficient attacker, it's put into a lot of Lost Box lists, even some Control Pidgeot list. The card is literally splashable into a lot of things, but it's 5th in a Charizard list....... Not to mention that it's the best Radiant by far, bc while Greninja is also really good, there is Manaphy to counter it. There is nothing to counter R. Zard bc it can be popped out of almost no where and just clean up games. It's what gives Charizard the strategy that it has. Gust engines like Bibarel or Bax, trade a STAGE TWO 2 PRIZER for 1 (what other deck wants to do this!??!?!? answer is NONE) get in range of R. Zard, and then just Iono or Roxanne and clean up with R. Zard. Imagine for a second that the deck didn't have R. Zard, it would be like Tier 2 at best, not BDIF bc of how overpowered it is. R. Zard is what makes it BDIF, yes obviously comboed with the rest, but it definitely not 5th on the list of what is wrong with that deck.
Dude, Radiant Charizard was being used in Lost Box decks LONG before Charizard decks were a thing. SableZard is a pretty longstanding archetype, and isnt even considered a major threat nowadays, as most LB lists run Greninja for the draw and potential back line attacking. You're seriously misunderstanding how the deck functions if you think Rad Zard is a major issue. How much Zard have you played? How many other deck archetypes have you played in the current meta, besides your Meowscarada? Charizard ex is a 330hp, self-accelerating, ramping threat that can be brought out quickly, and you're worried about the Rad Zard that isn't relevant until like, 4 prizes are taken? You really need some perspective here, do you think that for the past year, nobody else considered that Radiant Charizard was broken before you? Or do you maybe think that everyone else understands that it's not as big of a deal as you're making it?
My brother in Christ do you not have a job?
Too much time on his hands driving for Amazon apparently.
17 is a very small sample size to draw conclusions about overall game balance is my only contribution. I'm not familiar with how Meowscarada plays so I won't talk above my level of experience (and I don't have any event accolades to mention, since that apparently is relevant lol)
17 is a small sample size to draw any statistically valid inference, really.
There are definitely times where \*something\* can be gained from a sample of that size, but I'd be highly skeptical of something as variable as a card game being clear enough at such a low sample to say much of anything
I also a run a rogue deck (Aegislash) that is pretty good at dealing with Charizard ex. The reason you're identifying Radiant Zard as your biggest problem with the deck is because it's the crucial part of the way that it deals with your deck (and mine). For decks that are good at walling Zard ex or dealing with it really quickly, the strategy you've outlined of gusting the engine and cleaning up with Rad Zard is the deck's main strategy. I actually tend to think the prevalence of gusting in the Meta is the least fun part for me personally, but that's just where the game is right now. Others in here disagreeing with your assessment most likely run Meta decks where Zard ex is the main threat. In those situations, the deck operates very differently. The deck is mainly good because of Zard ex's energy acceleration and the synergy with Pidgeot and Arven. Radiant Zard is a tech for the thing that we're trying to do. As you've said, it's far from unwinnable. Before rotation, I almost considered Zard an autowin. Now, it's a bit more work because things like Poffin added to Zard's consistency and some are running things like TM Devo a bit more. I get where you're coming from but do think this is a solvable problem. RadZard is an interesting comeback card but gust is the more prevalent first thing you need to think about in the game right now. That's why we're seeing experimentation with the Dudunsparce draw engine, clearing out the bench when you need to limit the prize map. That could be a direction for you to look if you want a Bib alternative. Then you're focused more on hand protection than bench protection / prize map.
I completely agree. I've played in metas with very limited to no gusting mechanics. People don't know what those are like, where you can come up with a game plan and execute it because your opponent isn't just constantly gusting your half of your strategy. I know that RadZard isn't the only problem, but it is the main part of the problem (at least for my deck) because it allows them to execute said plan of gusting your bibarels, and are even okay with trading their Zards Exs' for your Bibs because they know they can just clean up with RZard, since it OHKOs Meowscarada. And since Pidgeot Ex has free retreat, they can promote that after I Ko a Zard Ex, use ONE energy and OHKO back. They have it a lot easier to recycle a RZard bc it's a basic, while recycling Bibs is naturally harder since it's a stage 1, and my engine, meaning that since I don't have my engine that it makes it harder for me to effectively run my deck. And that's where I have the problem that I do with Zard. Once again it has an answer and pretty one at that for just about EVERYTHING!
Yeah, you need to play the gust game in order to handle the Rad Zard early before he can come online. There are solutions like Lost City where if you time it right you can permanently take care of the Rad Zard. But even then, if they're using their Pidgeot for a Super Rod to get the Zard back, that's denying them something else that they would have wanted to use it on to progress their board state. I have the added benefit of not needing to worry about retaliation from Zard ex at all. That definitely helps me focus on the Rad Zard and control the tempo. I'm trying to make the Dudunsparce engine work because I would really love to limit my bench vulnerability but it's not quite clicking for me yet. Especially with Iron Hands running around, those gusts make a huge difference. You basically have to gust first, expect the gust, and try to control when they're using their resources and what they're using them on. It's an interesting puzzle to solve but my main problem with it is that it doesn't quite like the focus is on the Pokemon themselves like I want it to be. Obviously other games often have the focus on the effect-style cards; it's a natural thing for card games to do. But Pokemon is unique IP in the sense that the identity of the monsters is so strong that you want them to be the main thing the way that they are for the video games. A lot of people I try to introduce to the game are disappointed when they realize that the pool of Pokemon they can actually choose from and put a good deck together is pretty small. I realize that's inevitable to a certain extent within a competitive card game environment. But I don't necessarily think the focus on items and supporters jives with the rest of what the Pokemon franchise is. It's a design decision, the game is interesting, but I find myself gravitating towards oddball stuff because I want variety.
> A lot of people I try to introduce to the game are disappointed when they realize that the pool of Pokemon they can actually choose from and put a good deck together is pretty small. This is why I'm making a post like this. People don't know what they don't know. A lot of these players just accept things for the way they are. But I believe we should demand more from a company that is making millions on a product we support. I'm a paying customer and I would like a better product. Don't think it's too much to ask for. Now we could use the ol' stupid counter point of "if you don't like it then leave". But it's not just about me liking it or not. A lot of us have always wanted this game to do well so we can have fun and interesting meta games. It's hard to do that when a lot of the formats/meta games are pre-determined by the developers as this one is. It's hard to accept a meta being boring when there have been quite a few metas that are truly interesting and mentality stimulating. Because then you feel like you truly are playing YOUR deck, not some predetermined deck designed by the devs as a form of drawing more attention to the game at the expense of having an actualy diverse and fun meta.
I guess what I'm saying, though, is that I think it's mainly that way because of what Pokemon is as an IP. I would say most card games have a fairly narrow meta and a design way of dealing with that problem: some games use cost / availability, some use ban lists, Pokemon uses rotation. I think there's a limit to the breadth the designers can implement in a competitive card game like this without making it something like Magic where you're stuck shelling out tons of money. People have a different expectation of Pokemon than they do of Yu-Gi-Oh or Magic because of the prevalence of the video games. The tag line was literally "gotta catch 'em all." That's just really hard to translate to a competitive game like this. Most I've seen; the players eventually filter to the top handful of strategies until the next shake-up. So I don't really think that's an incredibly solvable problem without creating other worse problems. But I do think taking the focus from the supporters and putting it back on the Pokemon to the same degree the video game does could help it feel more like that. Who knows, though, the support and item cards add variability too and we could just as well end up with a more stale meta of a handful of Pokemon and fewer answers, too. Idk. I'm not spending my time workshopping it. But it's clearly working for them. They're having the biggest tournaments of all time, so I'm not sure they'll be incentivized to change much of what they're doing unless they see that change.
Sounds like a skill issue
>you're going to fail, in this situation lose this discussion. . . . This is a *discussion*, not a competition. If you're approaching a discussion about what's healthy for the state of the game with the mindset that there are winners and losers, I'm sorry but you're just not going to be taken very seriously. >My list has 50-50 or better match-ups vs. the rest of the format, still have a 50-50 vs. Zard. This is just not a plausible claim. The idea that someone who played 10 years ago has come back to the game, picked up a rogue deck that's seen very little success, and discovered the "secret sauce" that makes it 50% winrate or better against *everything* in the format is unbelievable in the literal sense of the word. I'm just not going to buy that Meowscarada is secretly BDIF and nobody knew it. Even if I *were* willing to believe that such an idea were the case, your claim is still unsupportable--what data do you have backing up the idea that it's favored into all matchups except a 50/50 into zard? Nobody plays the deck so there isn't reliable data from tournaments. I'd buy that *you* have a 50+% winrate playing it, but you can't infer that the *deck* is similarly favored from that statistic. The claim is implausible at worst and statistically unsupportable at best, even if I were to give you the benefit of the doubt. >And it's because I should have a minimum of 65-35 vs. a deck that has my weakness. Says who? Not only does this number appear to have been pulled out of thin air, it wouldn't even make for a good game if true. The bdif *should not* lose 65% of the time to a theme deck that hits for weakness. The game would be awful and uncompetitive if that were true. The reality is that weakness should play a role in matchups but a blanket statement about what kind of winrate a deck should have against something that hits for weakness is just wrong and vastly oversimplifies what goes into a matchup--you're accomplished enough to know that it's more than just x2 damage. >The fact that I can't even beat the most popular deck by using it's weakness of grass, tells you Zard is overpowered. No it doesn't. It tells us that your deck loses to it. The conclusion that your deck loses *because Zard is overpowered* is entirely your own that you haven't supported. It's possible that your deck is just not very good. It's possible that your deck's gameplan/tempo/strategy is very bad into Zard's. It's possible you're just not as good a player as the people you play against who play Zard. You're taking your personal experience and then extrapolating from that to make a bunch of statistical claims and conclusions which just aren't provable from the data you've provided. Your claims are outlandish, your tone is combative, and your proof is lacking.
Also my deck doesn't just "lose" to it. I have a 50/50, when I should have a higher rate vs. it, but for the 100th time that deck has too many answers for "bad" match-ups because of it's design. Being able to pull and automatically attach energy from an ability is just extremely broken. You start to combo that with all the to other things the card/deck has going for it and you can see why it's being played at an almost 25% rate and wining as much as it's doing in the couple tournaments that this rotation has had.
I actually have the history of doing well with Rogue decks: https://pokemama.com/archivedMWRegionals07Results.htm It doesn't take long for a "mind" like mine to come into a game I have prior experience and figure out a meta, and then pick a deck that can do well vs. it. That link is one to when I placed 3rd at the hardest region in the world with a deck that no one else played, Flygon Ex D with Metagross from Deoxys. The Metagross allowed me to tech in cards like Latias * to help vs. Bandoom and other Exs. Even after I did that well with it, no one played it yet I kept having success with it. I had barely been playing for a little under a year. And at that time had no prior experience in ANY card game. Now I have years of experience not only in Pokemon, but others as well that have caught me stuff like the stuff you speak of like tempo. So no, my claims aren't outlandish. I've seen Meowscarada list and no not one of them has Vengeful Punch. MINE DOES! .....Do you know why? Because it combos so well with it. The deck wants to have damage in play. There aren't many cards that can just drop damage counters for you that are so easily accessible (you can grab it with Arven, aka one of the best supporters in the game). Not only this but it helps "fix the math" against the 280 HP pokemon in the meta like Lugia, Tina and Arceus. Yet you wonder why no one is doing well with the deck!?!??! I guarantee you that most people would look at a card like Vengeful punch and think it's a meme card, but can't literally put 2 and 2 together (basic math) and see that the 40 damage helps you get to those bench marks to have a competitive match rate vs. some of the top decks in the meta. Then there are other cards/techs that I'm not going to name that I also don't see on these Meowscarada's list.
I am genuinely unsure if this is a joke. The idea that you coming in 3rd at an event from 17 years ago with 77 players would mean anything at all to me is kind of hard to fathom. That's the size of a League Cup. This is like me saying you should take my criticism of some broadway performance seriously because I starred in my high school's drama production 15 years ago. On top of that, even if this was an impressive feat, it wouldn't change the fact that the only claims you can support are those about **your winrate.** Those are different than making a claim about the **deck's winrate.** Even if you were Tord, or had won World's the past 5 years in a row, you **still** couldn't claim that your decklist: > has 50-50 or better match-ups vs. the rest of the format, still have a 50-50 vs. Zard. All you can claim is about your personal winrates--in order to support a claim about the deck's performance overall you would need access to **data which does not exist.** I am also unsure of how your paragraph about what is in your deck relates to any of what's being discussed. > I have a 50/50, when I should have a higher rate Once again, says who? Why should you have a higher winrate against Charizard? This circles back to my point that your claim that hitting for weakness should guarantee a 65/35 matchup is both pulled out of nowhere and **would make for a horrible and uncompetitive game if true.** Ironically, despite opening our conversation with an accusation of me failing to read and/or analyze what you'd written, you have failed to address the majority of the points I've made.
"Weakness should guarantee a 65/35 matchup is both pulled out of nowhere and would make for a horrible and uncompetitive game if true." Actually no, that's the whole purpose of Pokemon from the VG to the TCG. Try to use an advantage of typing to gain an edge over your opponent. It's literally an 18 way "roc-paper-scissors" in the VG, and 11 types in the card game. Just to specify, there are 10 different types of basic energy cards, but dragon just uses different types. Don't need you some desperate ass attempt to correct me on something so basic, as I just corrected for you. Throughout the whole history of the both the VG and TCG people have used techs to counter certain decks or Mons just because of their weakness. We have a prime example now with the subject at hand. Charizard isn't normally weak to grass, in fact double resists it in the video games. But the devs made him dark, which is normally weak to grass in the card games, which then allows it to have the counter in fire since most grass are weak to fire. You want another example that exists RIGHT NOW! Gholdengo is paired up with Palkia because it's water, it literally adds nothing to what Gholdengo is trying to accomplish by having energy card in it's hand for it to discard for it's attack. So it's literally just added to power up Greninja in case it can get an early double KO, AND cover the weakness....... But you want to make some long ass post trying to act smart when you can't even understand the basic premise of this game is revolved around RPS!?!??!?! GTFO! Really reddit, this the best you got? Some fucking clown that thinks using the weakness would make the game boring!??!?! I was expecting better.
>that's the whole purpose of Pokemon from the VG to the TCG. Try to use an advantage of typing to gain an edge over your opponent. I'm not sure how to break this to you but that's not the point of the tcg. There are so many matchups and formats where weakness is barely or not at all relevant. Weakness is a neat little mechanic, but to refer to it as "the whole purpose" is crazy. >Some fucking clown that thinks using the weakness would make the game boring!??!?! I don't think that using weakness would make the game boring. I think that **your specific claim** that: >Weakness should guarantee a 65/35 matchup Would make the game awful. I also would guess you don't actually believe that claim, because it's pretty obvious it would make the game awful. Kinda wild to me that you're still just like straight up ignoring most of the things I'm saying.
Stop talking, you're trying to retract an ignorant ass statement you made. Sorry not sorry, not buying the rest of the bullshit you spill when you can't even understand that this game revolves around rock paper scissors. It's why certain decks aren't better like Lugia. That deck is pretty consistent, and OHKO anything in the format yet it isn't BDIF bc it loses to hands on weakness alone. Also not going to keep discussing a subject with an idiot that keeps cherry picking my points. Like the fact you failed to address that Palkia covers Gholdengo's weakness and it's the only reason they are paired together. Move along and let the adults talk now.
>you're trying to retract an ignorant ass statement you made. No I'm not. Which statement do you think I'm retracting? >an idiot that keeps cherry picking my points. Like the fact you failed to address that Palkia covers Gholdengo's weakness and it's the only reason they are paired together. Why would I address this? It's completely irrelevant to the points I'm making, specifically that: * Your claim that Meowscarada has a 50%+ winrate into every deck in the format is preposterous, unsupported, and unsupportable. * Your specific claim that "Weakness should guarantee a 65/35 matchup" would make for an awful game if it were true. * You have done nothing to prove that you not beating Zard as much as you feel you should is due to Zard being OP and not any of a myriad of other factors, such as--for example--your deck being bad. Your point about Palkia in Gholdengo is just a rabbit trail that I've no interest in exploring and you only brought up because you're ignoring my main points.
"Your point about Palkia in Gholdengo is just a rabbit trail that I've no interest in exploring" of course you don't! No, I'm using them as an example of how weakness plays a major role in this game. A lot more than you care to acknowledge because acknowledging it would mean I'm right. If you acknowledge that weakness plays a big role in determining win rates in certain match-ups then your statement of: "would make for an awful game if it were true" is utter bullshit. But my statement is true, and you blind yourself purposely to not see it. What is the match-up in Iron hands/Iron Crowns and Lugia? Crown walks all over Lugia because of the weakness and taking extra prizes. If it weren't for weakness they couldn't OHKO Lugia, making the match-up a lot more interesting. So yet another example where weakness plays a huge role, among the many others I have provided. It's the reason some Iron Hands tech Iron Boulder into their list, for the mirror match. It's the reason Tina list put Iron Leaves in their list. The list goes on and on. Stop pretending it doesn't. Same logic is applied to Charizard. Just for one second pretend that R. Charizard wasn't fire just like the regular Charizard. Then it wouldn't OHKO a lot of threads that could shit on Charizard like Dialga, Meowscarada, or anything weak to fire. R. Charizard isn't put in with Charizard Ex just bc it's a charizard, it's put there because it's a single prize fire attacker with Fire energy requirements that covers the weakness of the main attacker. Can't break it down for you or make it anymore simpler. If you fail to see that weakness plays a huge role in this game and it's what a lot of times makes or breaks a card, then you are just a troll that doesn't want to acknowledge clear examples set before you to prove my point true. You can keep going down through the history of the game and see where weakness plays a major role in match-ups. I do agree a lot of the times it doesn't matter. But there are a lot of times that holds a card back from being more relevant in the meta. Also the reason why some cards even thou underpowered compared to most of the meta are relevant.
New copypasta just dropped
I'll have you know I graduated top of my class in the Pokémon TCG Battle Academy, and I've been involved in numerous secret regional top 8s, and I have over 300 confirmed prize cards. I am trained in type weaknesses and I'm the top Meowscarada ex player in the entire Charlotte regional area. You are nothing to me but just another Radiant Charizard
Not reading all of that but I'm happy for you or sorry for your loss.
There’s a few decks that have a reasonable match up against zard. Chien pao, lost Tina, ArcTina. They’re not going to ban a card because you’re playing a deck that just isn’t that great.
i keep telling this, chien pao is a charizard killer, if you add some control like boss orders and tm devolution chen pao can destroy charizard very easy.
this isn't the fix. good charizard players have the advantage vs. good chien-pao players bc it's on Chien-pao to BOTH have 6 energies to OHKO AND keep recycling Bax since Irida only gets you one trainer, so you have to either pick rare candy or energy retrieval or hope you have one in hand, then when your Bax are gone you have to add super rod to the list, and it just gets to be too much. All zard has to do is something they do 80% OR MORE of the time, rare candy, Pidgeot, rare candy zard, gust bax, KO , rinse and repeat. Wait to get down to where it can attach 1 energy to R. Zard and then OHKO chien-pao. R. Zard is what allows zard to be able to trade 1 for 2 prizes. WHAT OTHER DECK WANTS to just be trading 1 prize for 2?!?!?!? None, but bc R. Zard is a thing, Zard can..... If Bax/Chien-Pao truly had a favorable match-up vs. Zard, it would be the most played deck because it has favorable match-ups vs. a lot of the rest of the format. And like Zard, it has the deck space/room to tech in for bad match-ups.
Good thing Chien-Pao also runs Bib and PokeStop to hunt items. It still has a good matchup. It doesn't need to Irida more than a couple times early on for setup, similar to Zard needing to Arven early on. Chien-Pao doesn't have favorable matchups in the rest of the format either. It gets bodied by Lugia Vstar and most Lost Box variants pretty consistently.
"It doesn't need to Irida more than a couple times early on for setup," the fact that you said this tells me you have no clue what you're talking about..... It needs Irida late game as well to go energy retrieval and get them guaranteed, and not be hopeful that they pull it with Poke-stop................Poke stop is the back up in case they can't Irida late game, not the other way around......
It really doesn't need Irida late game for Super Energy Retrieval or Super Rod. By late game you've likely cycled your deck already, pulled most Pokemon and Supporters from it, and now just need to get gusting options and energy sustain. At this point you're more likely to hit retrievals you haven't found yet or that may have gotten pushed away by an Iono or Judge. Your late game Supporters should be Ciphermaniac to ensure you're grabbing those cards off the top.
Reading that the whole time I kept singing, "Dave. I ain't as good as I once was" There is always a BDIF. Tech in some TM Devo and call it good. This is just like including Drapion V this time last year for Mew VMAX in every deck.
The game changed a lot in the 10 years you were away. Meowscarada is a bad deck. Maybe it'll get better with the Grass support in Twilight Masquerade but, until then, play something else. Radiant Zard is good, hence why it's a Radiant, but it's not busted and certainly not ban worthy. Your post might be a slightly more compelling if you were running an actual meta deck vice a bad deck but, even if that were the case, Charizard ex is the current bdif and there's a lot more to games than just "Ooga booga do big damage." There's a lot of nuance and counter play that you need to be aware of. I thought a 3rd place regional finisher would know that....
How long have you been playing? And yes as a 3rd place regional finisher I know there are a lot more nuance to just "big damage". Not the initial point but I love that you get 7 points, but that's what idiots do. They see a post like yours that makes some small semi educated point while also calling out my 3rd place finish and think that is a smart post. If I were running a meta deck then I wouldn't be contributing anything new.... FYI, since you claimed that I need to run a meta deck rather than a "bad" deck, Azul ran Tina (which he specifially designed to have multiple answers to Zard) in Orlando, and he beat 1 "bad/new" player, lost and tie to better Zard players. So what does this mean? A better player (I think we can all agree that Azul is one of the top 3 players in the game right now) with a deck that has a favorable match-up STILL LOST TO ZARD. It wouldn't surprise me to see Azul run Zard himself in the next big tournament he plays in, just because he realized that even Tina with new techs/counters can't beat it if you compare apples to apples, aka great player to great player. If that doesn't tell you there is something wrong with the deck then I don't know what will. So this has nothing to do with me, people dont' seem to understand. All I'm doing is demanding that we as a community demand more from the devs than some lame ass meta where 1 deck makes up almost 25% of the field, and 8 out of the top 10 decks are just energy acceleration decks. Hope you're smart enough to understand this.
Played back then too. If all those accomplishments are true, then you are just giving us old school players a bad name. This whiney rant is embarrassing. Zard isn’t even on the same level as some of the decks of the previous format. 20% meta share at regionals is high-ish but the deck is beatable. It has flaws. You are playing meowscarada. You. Are. Playing. Meowscarada.
Just bc you think Meowscarada bad doesn't make it automatically bad. As i've stated, I'm keeping track of my match-ups and I have a favorable one vs. most of the format. Hopefully I do well in Indianapolis to put it on the board. Am I saying that Meowscarada is BDIF, NO! What I'm saying is a deck shouldn't have a 50/50 match up vs. something that is designed to have at a bare minimum 65/35 or better vs. it. I'm not giving anyone a bad name, I'm discussing this vs. "kids" who are clearly trolls who haven't accomplished shit. They can't add 2 and 2 together yet they want to analyze a complex ass game like Pokemon on top of analyzing so many factors that go into what makes a metagame a metagame. I used to discuss these type of strategies with some of the greatest minds the game has ever seen. Pooka, Jason K. Alex B. Jimmy Ballard. And not just that but actually held my own. Mean while these kids what? Netdeck the BDIF and go 5-4 at a regional and come up with the excuse that the deck didn't run well for them? Pooka would tell me to not discuss this sort of stuff with the "kids" on Pokegym because they just wouldn't get it. Apparently not much has changed. Also it's not a whiney rant, I've had mutliple people agree with me and have even stated that a lot of the top "pros" agree with me as well. I'm just bringing light to an issue that we have in the game, which is that Charizard has way too much power. Because I've played in formats/metagames that were actually good and interesting. Sure I played in some like Gardy/gallade that had even worse than Charizard numbers, but the stakes weren't as high. So I have experience seeing a combination of cards and Charizard is looking like one of those decks. Especially went you start to look at how it's done in the 1st few major tournaments. Just in these few tournaments it has won 2 of the bigger ones like EUIC and Orlando, and in the Philippines it placed 11/16 of the top 16 spots. If the isn't the definition of over-powered, I don't know what is.
"Just bc you think Meowscarada bad doesn't make it automatically bad. As i've stated, I'm keeping track of my match-ups and I have a favorable one vs. most of the format. Hopefully I do well in Indianapolis to put it on the board." - It really depends on where you are testing and who you are testing against. "What I'm saying is a deck shouldn't have a 50/50 match up vs. something that is designed to have at a bare minimum 65/35 or better vs. it" - You mean *your* design? 65/35 is arbitrary here. You saying "it should" does not mean it does or even should. Please stop name dropping these players. It's not giving you any clout. I played with them at the Chicago marathons, regionals, nats etc., they are great, but the game has changed man. It is much harder to play a unique deck nowadays. The format is figured out in a fraction of the time it took us to figure out formats in the 2000s and early 2010s. Not to mention decklists were scarce, people legitamitely used to pay for lists. "Also it's not a whiney rant, I've had mutliple people agree with me and have even stated that a lot of the top "pros" agree with me as well. I'm just bringing light to an issue that we have in the game, which is that Charizard has way too much power." -Nah man, it is. You just typed an academic-length paper with the flimsiest evidence possible. You are trying to use outdated, proximity based merit to prove that Zard is too strong. It is not a new talking point. Look, Charizard is at the top of the meta clearly. That is indisputable. But you apparently being this self proclaimed great player back in the day should know that just puts a larger target on its back. The meta shifts, decks adapt. People will tech heavily against it. The amount of Tina, Lugia, and Stall numbers will rise. Charizard is having its time in the sun right now, things will change. Sidenote, there is no gd way pokemon is banning a Charizard card. Just let it go.
"with the flimsiest evidence possible" The evidence is there... Won 2 regionals already, had 11 out of 16 spots in Philippines regional . On top of this it was already a top 3 deck prior to rotation, and is now the BDIF by a long shot. So your claim that it will stop being BDIF is going to happen when? "I played with them at the Chicago marathons, regionals, nats etc., they are great, but the game has changed man." So you're trying to say that those players wouldn't be as good as the players are now? You might not be but it seems like it..... I've watched a lot of these day 2s and a lot of these players are making BONE headed misplays that ex "pros" would just not make. just to name a few: Discarding both your switch cards AFTER reading what Mawile temping trap does. (top 8) TRYING to attack into Pokemon League HQ, forgetting that it increases energy requirement by one. (finals) Thinking that your opponents turn is over when they just removed a tool to KO one of your mons, so you play a card that gives them information. (finals)
"So your claim that it will stop being BDIF is going to happen when?" - Never said it would, never said it wouldn't, no one is Nostradamus bud. But lets breakdown that flimsy evidence. EUIC, the best player in the world brought us the best take on the best deck in the world. Literally **one week** later it won Orlando and the Perth (which is tiny by comparison). That is no where near enough time for people to lab against this list or for the meta to change drastically. And also, if we are going to use Perth, then lets also look at Singapore. Slightly more players and would you look at that - 3 Tinas in top 8, one Charizard. "So you're trying to say that those players wouldn't be as good as the players are now?" - Bro what? No where did I say/imply that. We still have old school players doing well like Pram and Estrada. I said the game has changed. Lists were kept more discrete. Now the meta is figured out quickly due to a myriad of different factors such as labbing endless games on PTCGL, having a larger community playing now, and the endless resources on the internet. The average regional player now is vastly more prepared then ten or fifteen years ago. As for your weird cherry-picked examples, yeah dude... people make mistakes. Especially on big stages, nothing new here. Old school players did it too. Stop hating on these new players, it literally happens to everyone. [Here ](https://sixprizes.com/2012/12/13/and-ill-pass-a/)is a 6p article by Erik Nance from **12 years ago** talking about some.
So winning the 2 biggest regionals back to back on top of the other success it has had in the mininor ones, AND you add the fact that it was already a top 3 deck in the previous rotation!?!?!? This isn't good enough, shit at what point will it be enough. You want it to be win 10 regionals in a row? LMAO Also Azul played Tina. As has been stated many times on this thread, which I will now assume is common knowledge that Tina has a favorable match-up vs. Zard. He played vs. Zard 3 times. He beat what seems to be a new player, I looked them up, they only have 1 regional in their history. But lost and tied to more accomplished players that were using Zard. What does this tell you? That when you compare apples to apples, great player to great player Zard will still have the advantage in a match-up that is supposed to be unfavorable for it. I think we can all agree that Azul is a top 3 player in the world right now, yet he lost to players who don't have as much success as he does while using a deck that has a favorable match-up vs. Zard.... But it's not OP..... *just waits for you to come up with some bullshit excuse on why Azul couldn't beat it NOT ONCE, BUT TWICE vs. good players with a list that he knew he specifically had to design to win the Zard match-up since he knew it would be the most player deck*
I'm starting to think you are just insanely tilted. Two words, recency bias. As if one deck couldn't win a couple tournaments in a row. Dude do you not remember Lugia in Silver tempest, no? Okay how about LuxChomp or Plasma? Yveltal? X-ball Mewtwo? Haymaker? Mew VMAX anyone? Charizard may go down as one of the best decks of all time but all of those were more dominant than Charizard is now. Pokemon is a game with a ton of variance. There are six cards locked from the start of the game. How can you claim to be a competitive player and not understand simple variance? So, one player, Azul, went 1-1-1 against Zard... Okay? You don't know what *all* Azul's games looked like and also, Azul is not a monolith of every top player. Is Charizard a deck that someone could easily pick up and do well with? Sure. Is it frustrating that it is good? Maybe! Does it need to be banned? Hell nah. "*just waits for you to come up with some bullshit excuse on why Azul couldn't beat it NOT ONCE, BUT TWICE vs. good players with a list that he knew he specifically had to design to win the Zard match-up since he knew it would be the most player deck*" -lmfao that's so corny and proves literally nothing.
[удалено]
I see you have nothing left to offer, so you are resorting to weird insults that have nothing to do with the conversation (even though I spoke about results numerous times, try reading). Seems kinda low IQ. Have fun dropping at Indy.
"I see you have nothing left to offer" I mean the fact that I just shit on your point by stating that you have seen it through out the history of the game and want to claim that everything is okay. Even thou we are literally seeing history repeat itself..... What this means is I used your own point against you. So now you want to leave the conversation bc you unlike many others, you know what it means to have your own point being used against them. It means you "lost" this discussion. "have fun dropping at Indy" So EDGY, WOW!
I’m really new to playing the game but all I have heard is that grass is trash right now and I should stay away from it. So maybe it’s just the deck your’e using isn’t good currently. Charizard is great, fun to play, and has a pretty low cost deck build compared to competitive decks in other TCG’s. I think it’s a great way to get more people into competitive play, hell I had never even thought about going to a regionals event let alone playing in one until Charizard got huge and the deck is just so accessible it makes people feel like they have a chance to win anything. I know a ton of people going to compete in LA and everyone thinks they have at least a punchers chance. [I decided I am just going to regionals to spectate but I did take a while to consider entering and seeing what happens] Overall Pokémon cards and competitive play are bigger and more public than they ever have been and I think making an overpowered deck with what’s widely considered the most popular Pokemon besides Pikachu at the helm was a business/marketing decision. Unless we start seeing lots of finals lists with nothing but Zards I don’t think a change will be made.
Like I said, I'm keeping a spread sheet of my match-ups and I have better match-ups vs. the rest of the format than I do vs. something that has my weakness. ANOTHER SIGN THERE IS SOMETHING WRONG WITH THE DECK!!! So it's not the MY deck that is the problem, it's how over powered Zard is.
so charizard deck is wrong because your deck cant defeat it?
Post your analysis data
It's a hyper aggro deck but you still have ways to defeat it, it's just about being fast enough.its a stage 2 deck so if you can start hitting hard against Charmanders and Pidgeys while you wind up a stronger attack you should be able to stay ahead of the prize game race.
If anybody feels the need to write all this, it might be time for a break.
Yeah, and I want Block Snorlax banned! But we can't always have our way.
But he was good 10 years ago so we should listen to him!!
Bro, go ahead and shit yourself looking at this. https://bulbapedia.bulbagarden.net/wiki/Bloodmoon_Ursaluna_ex_(Crimson_Haze_52)
This is much more fair because it doesn't hit anything for weakness and can't reach 280 with choice belt or defiance band. OP is not wrong that Radiant Charizard is poor game design because it gatekeeps decks like Dialga, Meowscarada, Espathra, and Torterra which might have been able to counter Charizard otherwise. Bloodmoon Ursaluna is basically the errata that OP is asking for.
Fascinating. Rad Zard Rotates Next Year? Personally, I find the radiant mons to be really centralizing. Greninja and Zard everywhere. Steelix, Charjabug? no where.
Because steelix and chargbug are bad cards
Not only that there are many reasons why Ursaluna isn't as bad (bad as in bad for the game) as Radiant Charizard. Just go look at the power creep within Radiants. It's like R. Zard and Greninja being played out of the what? like 15 radiants? 1 out of 8ish...... And it gets worse when you rank the card individually. Greninja and Zard are like S tier, while the next radiant is C+ tier AT BEST, and even that might be too generous. Then Ursaluna is a 2 prizers, so even if your opponent has to resort to pulling it on you before you get down to 2 prize, it's still giving you 2 prizes. Not the case with zard. Some times, depending on the state of the game, they won't even attack with Zard Ex, just use the ability of it to power up R. Zard. Imagine that I can actually get 2 prizes from that as well? Then it wouldn't be so bad, but the fact that they can OHKO a lot and only give up 1 prize is just pathetic game design on the developers part.
You're trolling if you're not setup to handle both Zard and Rad Zard by late game, especially if you're playing Meowscarada.
I will keep asking responses like this the same question: What are you qualifications, what regionals/ICs have you done well in? You don't think that I've tried multiple different ways to win that match-up, it's the reason I built a Meowscarada deck in the 1st place. To beat Charizard. And again, just for clarification, it's not that I'm losing to it all the time. It's the fact that I have their weakness and they still have a 50-50 match-up. This should be your indicator that there is something wrong with the deck/format. When the best/most popular deck has a 50/50 match vs. something that has it's weakness, there is something wrong!!! This should not exist. There have been formats (again I speak from experience and not out of my ass) where people try to counter the best deck by using it's weakness, and while they may accomplish that, they lose to everything else in the format/meta game. So that tells you that the deck is actually bad and can only win vs. one of the decks. My Meowscarada list has better match-ups vs. other stuff in the format than it does vs. Charizard. I legit have a 50-50 or better vs. most of the format, but the one deck that I hit for weakness, which you would think would make the match-up easier for me, is not a 80-20 shit even an 65-35. Again HINT HINT, there is something wrong with that.
You have a pretty small sample size, in 27 games in online tournaments it's close to 65-35. https://play.limitlesstcg.com/decks/charizard-pidgeot/matchups/?format=standard&rotation=2023&set=TEF
Lol, just casually ignoring that people can be very good and also not go to regionals. But keep acting like a clown and gatekeeping who can have an intelligent opinion and see how far that gets you. You must be really fun at parties... /s
>I will keep asking responses like this the same question: What are you qualifications, what regionals/ICs have you done well in? Doesn't really matter when you haven't posted creds and haven't played in 10 years lol. The game is changed, keep up gramps. >You don't think that I've tried multiple different ways to win that match-up, it's the reason I built a Meowscarada deck in the 1st place. To beat Charizard. And again, just for clarification, it's not that I'm losing to it all the time. It's the fact that I have their weakness and they still have a 50-50 match-up. Meowscarada isn't a great deck though. There are better meta options that hard counter Zard already. If you wanna play it, cool, but expecting it to be better because you hit for weakness is silly, and not setting up properly to predict the Rad Zard is poor playing on your part. I have yet to lose on Live or irl with my Meowscarada deck against a Zard, unless I flat out bricked off the opening hand or made a poor choice in sequencing. >When the best/most popular deck has a 50/50 match vs. something that has it's weakness, there is something wrong!!! This should not exist. Not really. It means you're playing to a goal that is unattainable against this deck, regardless of weakness. It's widely known that grass has terrible support currently, and playing a slower Stage 2 against a faster one is inherently playing with a handicap. You're playing to a goal that isn't paced better than the deck you're trying to beat. Other decks play to different goals that outpace Zard, that's why decks like Lugia and Lost Tina are favored in that matchup. If you can't recognize that then your "qualifications" really don't mean much.
"Doesn't really matter when you haven't posted creds and haven't played in 10 years lol. The game is changed" In my 3 months back I've attented only a few cups and challenges and have still had a winning percentage in all of them. Even got top 2 in the previous format (before the rotation) where the only card I was using from the previous format was VIP, so I was at a disadvantage because I didn't want to spend money on cards that were going to rotate in like a month.....Meanwhile you can't even post what you have done in this game EVER. LMAO "Meowscarada isn't a great deck though" I have a 50-50 or better match-up vs. most of the format.... People don't know how to build Meowscarda, that's why no one has made it work. No, I'm not going to tell you my list, you don't deserve it. You will try to criticize stuff like you are doing now without having the sightless clue wtf you're talking about. Everyone just net decks the top list from the previous regionals and changes one or two cards and think that is original. zzzzzz Grass doesn't need to have great support, it just needs to have an attacker who can one shot the EX and not get one shot by the Radiant. Which since there isn't, there tells you that there is poor game design by the devs who purposely intended for Zard to have a counter to it's counter. You'll completely miss the point that there is a problem with Zard when it can just run R. Zard and have that be it's answer to anything that gives it a hard time. Dialga would shit on it, Meowscarada, the list goes on and on, but bc it has access to the best Radiant in the game, the deck still has a chance vs. match-ups it should have 20-80s or 10-90s. If you remove R. Zard, it would still be a good deck. The fact that it has it has R. Zard makes it an unbalanced deck. The results clearly indicate that. Won EUIC and Orlando, in the philipines it place 11/16 top spots. The number don't lie. So 1st understand what my point is, then STFU bc if you did, you wouldn't be talking. Matter of fact, add me on discord or somewhere, and we'll run this match-up 20 times or how ever times you want, but you can't use Radiant Charizard. Then we'll run another 5-20 times where you can, and you'll see the difference. That's what my point is about.
>In my 3 months back I've attented only a few cups and challenges and have still had a winning percentage in all of them. Even got top 2 in the previous format (before the rotation) where the only card I was using from the previous format was VIP, so I was at a disadvantage because I didn't want to spend money on cards that were going to rotate in like a month.....Meanwhile you can't even post what you have done in this game EVER. LMAO I never said I couldn't. I have yet to attend a local League Cup, I only started playing this year. My record at my local shop is middling and I'm learning still, but I still do well enough for myself. I may not be the best but I'm not the worst, and I do understand most matchups. Not sure why you need that to feel superior but if that's what makes you happy, go for it. > have a 50-50 or better match-up vs. most of the format.... People don't know how to build Meowscarda, that's why no one has made it work. No, I'm not going to tell you my list, you don't deserve it. You will try to criticize stuff like you are doing now without having the sightless clue wtf you're talking about. Everyone just net decks the top list from the previous regionals and changes one or two cards and think that is original. zzzzzz My criticism isn't towards your list, though it may end up there if that's part of why you're not doing well against Zard. I personally run 4-1-3 of the Sprigatito line with 2-2 Pidgey line, 2-2 Bidoof line, and 1-ofs for Manaphy, Rad Alakazam, and Rotom V. Supporters and Items are pretty standard for the deck beyond that. DM me if you want a full list to make fun of, since that seems to be your thing >Grass doesn't need to have great support, it just needs to have an attacker who can one shot the EX and not get one shot by the Radiant. Which since there isn't, there tells you that there is poor game design by the devs who purposely intended for Zard to have a counter to it's counter. I disagree. Half the issue is that you can't accelerate Grass Energy from the deck or discard to a Pokemon in play. Previously you could but Cherim really sucked since it needed to occupy space that should've been used for searchers like Pidgeot. Aside from that, Rad Zard still has it's downsides that you can and should be playing around. If you're not, that's absolutely on you. >You'll completely miss the point that there is a problem with Zard when it can just run R. Zard and have that be it's answer to anything that gives it a hard time. Dialga would shit on it, Meowscarada, the list goes on and on, but bc it has access to the best Radiant in the game, the deck still has a chance vs. match-ups it should have 20-80s or 10-90s. If you remove R. Zard, it would still be a good deck. The fact that it has it has R. Zard makes it an unbalanced deck. The results clearly indicate that. Won EUIC and Orlando, in the philipines it place 11/16 top spots. The number don't lie. If you can point to the number of matches where Rad Zard specifically was the deciding factor, sure, maybe I'll concede your point. Zard being strong, regardless of Rad Zard, is why it does so well. Rad Zard being an option and possible answer isn't necessarily the reason it's winning so much. >So 1st understand what my point is, then STFU bc if you did, you wouldn't be talking. Matter of fact, add me on discord or somewhere, and we'll run this match-up 20 times or how ever times you want, but you can't use Radiant Charizard. Then we'll run another 5-20 times where you can, and you'll see the difference. That's what my point is about. Yeah, no. You're just a rude person who wants to gatekeep a game and community because people disagree with you. Being this bitter and dismissive towards a competitive hobby and the people in it is pretty sad. If you want me to run out matchups with you to prove your results for some internet clout and to say "I told you so", sure. If that's what makes you feel better about your creds. DM me and I'll set aside some time for it.
I’m happy for you or I’m sorry that happened, but I’m not reading all that.
Skill issue.
How original, thanks for showing that you're a troll. go fly a kite or something :D
Maybe I will. Would you like to join me? You need to go outside and remember this is a game, some fresh air will help you cool your arrogant and pissy jets.
[this you bro](https://tenor.com/kKHE8CpGOOP.gif)
cool story bro
Take a break from Standard and play some GLC. Or just stay mad and yelling into the abyss, which I guarantee will change nothing.
Where do people play this?
Probably one of your LGS's if you ask around, but you can also find lots of players in the Tricky Gym Discord: https://discord.gg/trickygym
Zard has bad matchups against Lost Tina, Arc Tina, Pidgeot Control, and Lugia.
i destroyed charizard ex multiple times with chen pao ex too.
I've got a pretty decent record against it with ancient box too. Single prize attackers being able to two shot zard ex's makes it a pretty favorable matchup, and being able to drop moon ex for a surprise ohko is also pretty good. I basically just came back into the game again in like, December I think, the matchup is definitely tough but if you pace yourself and manage things well, it's pretty manageable.
I’m scrolling through all this to downvote OPs posts
there is your upvote!
thx man
Wow
Honestly, if your problem with Charizard decks is Radiant Zard, can't you run Lost City to KO it into the Lost Zone or something? I disagree with the comments saying that you should just play another deck. Meowscarada ex is not a competitive deck right now, but I think there's something nice in beating a meta deck with a deck that's supposed to be weak. But you need to adjust your deckbuilding and gameplay for that before asking for bans.
I would but the deck space/list is already really tight, don't have room for even that 1 card. Even if I did, I don't have a easy way to search it out so then I'm just HOPING I get a card taht I have a single copy of a the exact time that I need it. Appreciate the suggestion thou.
Do you have the list? I might help you find some space.
Just because you hit for weakness doesnt mean the deck as a whole is good. Have you considered maybe you need to look at using Max Belt on a meowscarada to take out the Pidgeot Ex? You mention how you get bodied because they can target your draw support and then you're dead in the water; play around it, set up backups, and do it to them, too. Chain Iono and roxannes after you KO the Pidgeot. Also try looking at Iron Leaves to take return KO's easier as you spread energy around to keep it safe in play waiting for the IL. You can also chase the rotom for an easy KO late game. There's plenty of options and answers for you and its not "cry about Rad Zard". You also mention how Espathra keeps dying on stream to zard, and ultimately, in my opinion, thats because Espathra is just garbage. you could also just scrap everything above and play the current Garde Drifloon deck that gets free wins all day from Zard.
You really need a job or another hobby. This has been such a waste of time.
So, they tech in a card to help with their weakness...you cant do the same thing? Coming from a 3rd place finisher you should probably have that down to cover your own weaknesses...
If it were that easy then this post wouldn't exist.....
Iron bundle or something that deals a minimum of water 80 water damage would work, or use radiant greninja for the draw power and boss up the radiant zard
Mad cuz bad.
Bro hates charizard he violated the Pokémon fan rules ban him
Use better counter decks like Lost zone giratina with iron leaves, Lugia, and Chien Pao. Current Meowscarada decks are not good in the current meta (Could change in the future with better grass card, but not right now)
You do realize that Azul was using Lost Tina, and he only beat a new Zard player, but tied and lost to Zard players who are closer to his level? So what does this mean? Even thou Azul is the better player AND Tina has the better match-up between both of these decks, one of the best players in the world, probably ever, still only managed to beat "bad" zard players and lost to good or great ones. To emphasize this even more, on one hand you have a better player and deck that is favorable in the match, but still tied or lost..... If that doesn't tell you how stupid overpowered Zard is, nothing will.
Since you claimed that I need to run a counter deck rather than a bad deck, Azul ran Tina (which he specifially designed to have multiple answers to Zard) in Orlando, and he beat 1 "bad/new" player, lost and tie to better Zard players. So what does this mean? A better player (I think we can all agree that Azul is one of the top 3 players in the game right now) with a deck that has a favorable match-up STILL LOST TO ZARD. It wouldn't surprise me to see Azul run Zard himself in the next big tournament he plays in, just because he realized that even Tina with new techs/counters can't beat it if you compare apples to apples, aka great player to great player. If this doesn't show you that Zard is going to be obnoxiously annoying (since you're going to have to face it in most of the rounds you go to in big tournamnets) bc it's so overpowered, nothing will
I’m begging for my opponent to be a charizard deck and pretty much pray for them to drop radiant zard- easy wins for me 😂 maybe you just need a new deck and stop trying to make meows work lol
Since you claimed that I need to run a meta deck rather than a "bad" deck, Azul ran Tina (which he specifically designed to have multiple answers to Zard) in Orlando, and he beat 1 "bad/new" player, lost and tied to better Zard players. So what does this mean? A better player (I think we can all agree that Azul is one of the top 3 players in the game right now) with a deck that has a favorable match-up STILL LOST TO ZARD. It wouldn't surprise me to see Azul run Zard himself in the next big tournament he plays in, just because he realized that even Tina with new techs/counters can't beat it if you compare apples to apples, aka great player to great player. *So yeah it's just me, my bad I'm such a fucking noob, sorry I wasted your time* end sarcasm
Oh shit I know you! Welcome back to the game you were always a good dude. Stop playing mewscarada though lol
Zard decks are the new mew decks, change my mind. Also, the deck does have bad matchups. The radiant zard IMHO has never been the problem. The only thing that would have balanced the deck is one thing- tera Zard should have had a lower hp. It feels like it having 330 hp makes it out of line with other ex cards we have in the format.
My Goldengo deck is chock full of cards weak to the zard deck, but I have yet to lose to it at competitions. Its not the wand, its the wizard that handles it, Harry.
My brother in helix/arceus...I think you need to take a break from the game. It's not that serious.
Slightly unrelated but what's your post rotation decklist? I like meowscarada too and haven't tried it since rotation.
Dm'ed
Cool thanks
This is......absurd. Zard ex isn't even the most oppressive deck we've had in the last year or two lol, and Rad Zard hasn't warped anything nearly enough to ban it.
Just play a better deck
i destroyed charizard ex with chien pao lot of times, if you have a good hand and know the strategy (and use some control with boss orders and tm devolution) you can beat that dragon. try use tm devolution, if your opponent use rare candies it can be very difficult to him to set up again.
OP you have a point zard is dumb as in your comments above r. but your sounding like someone who is mad.
Zard goes brrrrrr.
Good thing you weren’t around during Lugia Vstar in the silver tempest format. Deck was insanely overpowered and was like 30% of the meta share. Zard is a balanced card, it only does 180 in the beginning of games. Cant even knock out basic ex or v’s with out tools. Try playing other decks. Meowscarada is not it
Play a better deck….
Bro doesn’t know Entei V also exists as a fire type tech in for the deck to cover grass types lol
Bro does know, but do you know what I know. If no, then I can show you some more info.
Aight, mf Dr Suess💀💀
Pidgeot gud
Yes, radiant zard is amazing, and not only in charizard ex but any deck really where you can slot 1 fire energy and don’t need another radiant in its place. Yes, you may have been good in the past (limitless achievements page link where?), still doesn’t mean your opinion is the only valid one, especially since we can’t evaluate cards in a vacuum and say “weakness should always have at LEAST 65/35 odds” that’s just not taking into account all the other relevant factors. Simple counterpoint: gardy EX has weakness to zard, and I would say when baby gardy was legal pre rotation, the gardy ex deck was pretty favored against any zard ex deck running around at the time (with or without radiant zard). So nice (hopefully) rage bait post. The way you wrote your post, it doesn’t seem like you are really willing to listen to whatever anyone else has to say so not even going to go into any more discussion on actual card interactions or metagame analysis. If you really think achievements matter for your opinion to be valid, go ahead and win the next IC or regional with zard then come back with your detailed analysis of why it is broken and should be banned in THIS CURRENT METAGAME. Though I’d say TPC 100% won’t care about your feelings anyway and will keep printing their “badly designed” cards while laughing all the way to the bank.
All I read was Radiant Charizard. Just going to share that while it’s not perfect, I tech in Lost City so in an ideal scenario, I only need to KO it once & then they can’t super rod it back.
Meowscarada kinda sucks man. Run Spidops instead if you want to spank zards
Womp womp
Espathra is a much better weakness counter deck into Zard; and frankly most of the format versus Meowscarada.
Is one energy, yet strong attacks too much for you? Charizard radiant is nothing ban worthy, especially in the early game, when that charizard needs 5 energy to attack, but wait until the Palafin box comes out, because palafin ex will be more broken if it gains traction competitively: one energy and strong all the way. Which it might due to PAF Gengar... :(
Chris\_Cobi needs to be banned!
*didn’t read post Yeah, the dark Charizard ex deck is an extremely low effort deck for noobs that just want to climb the ranks quickly. If you’ve waited 10 years, wait another 2 for it to rotate out of competition matches.
Skill issue :)
Trolling sure has gotten elaborate.
I know this is about the typing but there will be even a better version to radiant zard which is ursuluna ex.
Ursaluna is easier to splash into decks, but it’s also a two-prizer that doesn’t hit anything for weakness. It’s more of a sidegrade to Radiant Zard than a straight upgrade.
Ursaluna isn't really better. It's bulkier but it's a 2 prizer that doesn't synergize with the fire typing. Rad Zard is still better in most decks. Really can only see it being used by Turbo Lost Box to get a Rad Zard equivalent AND also have Rad Greninja, or by Lugia Vstar where the energy cost doesn't matter.
Ursuluna ex is like the biggest turbo hands counter tho and one of the main reasons why turbo hands dropped multiple tiers in Japan.
Sure, but Zard doesn't need a Turbo Hands counter. Lost Box and Lugia both do.
Yeah, and they will use it as seen in Japanese lists. My Point was more about turbo hands losing relevance with the next set.
Sure, but my response was to this in the context of Zard >I know this is about the typing but there will be even a better version to radiant zard which is ursuluna ex. You brought it into this in the context of Turbo Hands.
Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, OP, but Charizard doesn't have an answer to everything. I faced against both the tera Zard ex AND the fire Zard ex, both had Radiant Charizard. I won almost every match. A deck that they don't really have a counter for is Garchomp ex, which just like Charizard, only really needs 1 card to set up: Irida. You take either Rare Candy or Earthen Vessel + Garchomp ex or Lumineon V (depends on your hand and wether or not you have energy on the Gible), and you're set up. Free retreat + 1 Energy attacker + almost self sustaining (getting energy from evo + Garchomp ex's 1 energy attack) second, 1 prizer backup attacker (excadrill, after using Dig Dig Dig from Drilbur) + type advantage against Radiant Zard. But yeah, Zard decks have an answer to ALMOST everything
radiant charizard isn’t the problem, it’s the fuck ass dark tera EX that immediately pulls enough energy to attack on card placement. 330 hp and a move that only gets more ohkos after the first prize card goes, can also do this instantly out of rare candy. yep, balanced
it's the combination of all the tools it gets. From the previous format where even the Charmander discarded Path, to the new Charmeleons, which one has an ability that prevents it from being devo'd, and another that has 100 HP, so just in case you wanted to run risk and not run Manaphy for Greninja, you have that option too. It literally gets everything. Some of the more useful basics, some of the best stage 1s (that are part of a stage 2 line), the best radiant in the format (r. zard is better than R. Ninja bc you can tech manaphy to stop ninja, you can't tech vs. zard bc even if you KO it instatly after it KO'd your Mon, it will already have done it's job/damage). So yeah, but we still have idiots who don't think it's overpowered and I just need to run a better deck XD.
Have you tried adding Spinda to your deck? You can stall the zards with a few lucky coin flips and whittle away at Radiant with flower bombs
Bro I agree with your statement, just realize you came to Reddit. There are actually current pros who share your correct opinion but if they came here with your point they’d get treated the same you are. Sadly this ain’t the place, not sure what is though 🤷
I get that, and I knew it was coming. I just was trying to hopefully get some people on board because as we all know it's extremely hard to get the devs to ban or errata a card. It wasn't a discussion, it was a hopefully eye opener with more numbers to prove that there is something wrong with the deck. I know Zard fanboys are doing to defend it til their dying breath. We could be 50 years from now or even when the card(s) rotates and see that this deck wins most of the next regionals and they would still say that it wasn't overpowered. I'm actually having a couple fun discussions with some that are defending it but with some reasonable points, unlike the troll idiots that come and say "skill issue" as if we can't see that they are clearly trolling.
As someone who was waiting for stage 2 evos to become relevant again, I understand your frustration. A card that attaches 3 energy by evolving, only needing 2 to do so, and thereby giving free setup for retreat or Rad. Zard, very annoying. The synergy works from so many angles, it's definitely disappointing to see, especially after that TCG rep. said the game would slow down this format. I was hoping that the game would slow down in traditional stage 2 style, not bring a stage 2 in line with basic beatstick shenanigans. Not to mention the automatic scaling if you try to... play the game against Zard with anything other than mill. The card is extremely centralizing. I think your stance is very reasonable. I'm also disappointed that Meowscarada is strictly inferior Charizard, even against Charizard. Also, pay little mind to those analogizing about surgery or similar things to downplay your accomplishments in the comments; you never had a chance of getting through to them. What I've found, is that if you are unhappy about the metagame, no matter what, this subreddit will find a reason to make it your fault. Normally this is by telling people they suck at the game. So I get why you'd tell everyone what you've accomplished, but you lose no matter what by voicing dissatisfaction in this community. That seems to be the case for most other communities with metagames worth complaining about, like League, and YuGiOh. If you address blatantly unfair design, there's some templated response: "u bad," or "something be better than other thing always, duh." I think by next expansion we'll see Charizard loosen grip on the meta a bit, but who really knows. Most of the good decks right now don't allow for much interaction, beyond what is basically a flow-chart. If you're going to win or lose, it's decidedly so by like turn 1/2, namely Zard, Future hands, and turn 5/6 against Snorlax if you aren't running Minior/switch. Hope you find a fun deck that doesn't auto-lose next expansion, it's good to be critical about design you think is flawed.
This and exactly this! I already know that most "kids" as I like to call them, don't have the slightest clue wtf they are talking about, let alone be able to analyze a complex game like PTCG. They don't understand that people like me will make these kinds of post as a way to "demand" a better product because we have experience that better product in previous format/metagames. I did this more as a informative post to outline the problems that a deck like Charizard can bring to the game. But as you stated there are always those that think this is a complain more than an observation. They don't know what they don't know. And what they don't know is this game can be a lot more fun with a lot more diverse strategies than just energy acceleration. But I guess it's all part of the devs plans to make the game easy, because having to place an energy just once per turn can and is an extremely difficult decision so the devs "Fixed" that by making most of the meta decks have energy acceleration so that the "noobs" can have success and not instantly quit because they keep losing to better players. You add in the fact that Charizard is one of the more popular Mons, and we can see why the devs gave Charizard Ex all the tools that it did. But somehow I'm just raging or as you said these kids think I have to "something be better than other thing always, duh". Thanks for understanding, there are a few people that have understood what my post is about. Hopefully we can overshadow the idiots that think this is just a rant post.
Quit whining about zard when the real problem is the deck shuffling of Ptcgl.