If you do want to start getting into the game then something you do need to consider is the upcoming Standard format rotation (see the link for more details) as from the above suggested products the Zacian and Inteleon League Battle decks plus the Trainer's Toolkit are going to be the least effected for that format. They also have the advantage that each League Battle deck can be upgraded with the contents of the Trainer's Toolkit and some singles which therefore reduces the overall cost. There's also the upcoming Inteleon League Battle deck as well. The best products for getting into the game atm because they provide a lot of the staple cards you need usually for cheaper than buying the singles are the League Battle decks Pikachu & Zekrom, Reshiram & Charizard, Zacian and a Trainer's Toolkit. From memory a single copy of the most recent expensive staple card at lowest rarity when the set was released ran to around $70 and you needed a couple of copies (this was a couple of rotations ago). Another factor atm is that with the irl season being closed demand and therefore prices for real playable cards is somewhat lower that would normally be the case but compared to what little I know of Mtg prices playing Pokemon is pretty cheap. Prices of decks will vary according to whether you already have the staples as a lot of them are transferable between decks eg Crobat V, Quick Ball etc and how much you want to bling things out. You might also want to head over to r/pkmmtcg if you've got other questions like this as it's more about the playable side of the game. specialists have proven time and again to be similarly successful as those who have the resources to participate in the 'winners meta' dictated by highly skilled/well-rounded grinders and pros looking to next level eachother.Here's a list of useful resources including sources for decklists. its partially why its recommended to choose a deck you can be reasonably sure is 'competitively viable', not chase the meta, and instead hone your experience with that one deck to combat the breadth and uncertainty. for instance how does going 13-2 in 5-0 leagues where a good number of players prioritize finishing quickly and or at their own leisure compare to going 13-2 in a prolonged large tournament where you are facing significantly better players towards the end.īasically what im getting at is that without a sheer volume of match data to statistically marginalize all that 'noise', you are better served acknowledging goldfish's and top8's numbers as a general baseline then form your own conclusions given the context of how you play the format. even MTGO 5-0's can be misinterpreted because the platform and 5 match leagues coupled with a small to medium dedicated base of players able to acquire cards easily may not be the 'modern' that you experience at all. you can narrow down the results, but even still its limited by top8s which can be marginally to no different than getting top16 or top32 performance wise.īoth showcase this kind of ongoing illusion that the 'meta' is shifting and cycling, or even exists for that matter, for the majority of modern players relative to their own experiences. id say its true that the majority of modern players arent regularly playing in large events that people travel further to however spiking a top8 at a 16 player 4 round event likely including only locals playing whatever deck because that is what they own is going to skew overall top8 numbers. Top8's numbers on the other hand are tainted by including small, and arguably inconsequential, local events. for example a deck like Blue Moon can have its share artificially boosted, but it won't overtake a deck like burn. you just cant tell to what extent, especially for decks close together. however assuming those 5-0 postings include a copy of most every deck out there, notably the 'top' ones then the general structure/ordering of the 'metagame' outline provides some insight into decks significantly more likely to be better than others. Goldfish's numbers are tainted by curated mtgo 5-0 list dumps. what you will absolutely NOT find in either is a 'meta' based off of matchup win percentages in tandem with overall win percentage and representation.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |