Zoroark-GX should be banned?

[Michealgomes]

Sup all!

 

I was interested in knowing if anybody else feels the same way I do about Zoroark-GX deserving to be banned. I feel that personally this card should have been made into a prism card forcing players to run only one copy of the card in there decks if they choose.

 

I feel that there are too may variations of Zoroark-GX decks both in standard and expanded, making the meta to be quite dull. This forces players to either play decks that have a favorably match-up against the deck (such as Buzzwole-GX) or having to take-up card space in your deck to run Zoroark-GX hate cards (which I find annoying)  ********************** ******************** ************************

Overall I feel that if Zoroark-GX would be banned it would open up the meta allowing other decks to see viable competitive play and freeing up space in players decks to run other cards that can make gameplay more interesting.

 

Thanks for reading! 

 

Edited July 14, 2019 by Michealgomes

[Felidae_]

Before the ban fan that got rid of Hex Maniac, Puzzle and Ghetsis I would have agreed with you, as those were the tools that made the deck omnipresent in the meta.

Nowadays the card is relatively fair, especially in the Standard format.

Looking at the meta and the recent tournament results I see little arguments in favour of banning the card (especially since its going to rotate out of Standard anyway).

 

[Otakutron]

21 hours ago, Felidae_ said:

Before the ban fan that got rid of Hex Maniac, Puzzle and Ghetsis I would have agreed with you, as those were the tools that made the deck omnipresent in the meta.

Nowadays the card is relatively fair, especially in the Standard format.

Looking at the meta and the recent tournament results I see little arguments in favour of banning the card (especially since its going to rotate out of Standard anyway).

 

 

For that matter, even if Zoroark-GX got a surprise reprint so that it was only temporarily gone from Standard... no more Double Colorless Energy.  Triple Acceleration Energy would still be an option but that's one and done.  Granted, it isn't like a (surprise reprint) Zoroark-GX could still use Acerola in the 2020 Standard Format, either.

 

What about Expanded?  I'm the nutter who wants stuff like DCE banned from Expanded, because I think the general issue with most of the stuff I consider to be "overly good" is just the pacing; when you have a little too good of draw power, of search power, of Energy acceleration, etc. across the board, otherwise balanced cards become insanely good.  Though it is quite possible Zoroark-GX could still be "too good" after excising such cards from the card pool.

 

Tell you what, @Michealgomes I'm not playing enough right now to volunteer, but you should see if you can find enough competent (or better) players to help you "test" the Expanded Format sans Zoroark-GX.  You'll have to do it via direct challenges on the PTCGO, of course, but do it and see if it really makes a difference to the metagame or not.  Then share your results here.

[Sadra]

Nothing needs to be banned. I do not know about standard but in expanded there are so many options to beat zoroark I don't even bother to list. A few of them are pikarom, reshizard tag teams and fighting decks: you would struggle against them unless they dead draw. The strongest zoroark variant I believe so far is the raticate/zoroark/ariados list but it could be easily countered by ability lock or stall decks. 

 

I have seen a video about why DCE needs to be banned and to be honest, I really don't get it. The top decks that run DCE are obviously night march variants, zoroark, and seismitoad but all of these decks have a pretty bad matchup to most of the competitive decks in expanded now. No offense but it seems to me that those people who want those cards banned just simply dislike deck strategies that focus on DCE. Also to keep in mind is that while the banning of some cards lead to a healthier format, simply pressing the ban button too easy isn't that good, because there will always be superior decks in a format, and then more people insisting banning, and then the viscous cycle goes on. 

 

 

[Otakutron]

 

On 7/14/2019 at 1:03 AM, Sadra said:

Nothing needs to be banned. I do not know about standard but in expanded there are so many options to beat zoroark I don't even bother to list.

 

The criteria for a card being banned is not limited to it creating an unbeatable deck.  One has to consider how that card interacts with the players, game mechanics, and organized play.  Indeed, if a card enables a deck that is particularly unpleasant to face, creates issues with the present (or anticipated future) cardpool, or causes issues with tournament proceedings, it may need to be banned.

 

At present, I do not believe this applies to Zoroark-GX, but there's enough there that I cannot rule it out.

 

On 7/14/2019 at 1:03 AM, Sadra said:

I have seen a video about why DCE needs to be banned and to be honest, I really don't get it.

 

Then consider starting a thread asking for help understanding if you really want folks to change your mind.  I'm in the opposite boat; I've watched multiple videos, participated in various discussions, etc. trying to convince me that Double Colorless Energy is well-balanced; none have convinced me, and I struggle not to jump to conclusions about those who hold the position.  Assuming why a person believes something is a good way to shutdown discussion, hence the need to avoid jumping to conclusions. ;)

[Sadra]

9 hours ago, Otakutron said:

The criteria for a card being banned is not limited to it creating an unbeatable deck.  One has to consider how that card interacts with the players, game mechanics, and organized play.

Totally agree. 

 

9 hours ago, Otakutron said:

Indeed, if a card enables a deck that is particularly unpleasant to face, creates issues with the present (or anticipated future) cardpool, or causes issues with tournament proceedings, it may need to be banned.

This is a bit subjective in my opinion, it is difficult to define what is 'unpleasant' and what are considered 'true issues'. Some players hate playing against item lock, others loathe shocklock and they could all be 'unpleasant' and 'create issues'. Quantitative parameters should be better. I think I may have created a misunderstanding in my previous post, I mean that  currently nothing needs to be banned in expanded because I see things quite balanced (of course there are decks that are powerful but this is for every game, but nothing one-sided), nothing too overpowered at the moment, and nothing that destroys gaming experience or is against the integrity of the game. 

9 hours ago, Otakutron said:

if you really want folks to change your mind.

I am not here to change anyone's mind, just presenting my own opinion. 

 

9 hours ago, Otakutron said:

I'm in the opposite boat; I've watched multiple videos, participated in various discussions, etc. trying to convince me that Double Colorless Energy is well-balanced; none have convinced me, and I struggle not to jump to conclusions about those who hold the position.

I understand the reasons that you think DCE is OP. My opinion is that while it is efficient and has great synergy with a wide range of cards (e.g. acerola), decks that use DCE or TAE (triple acceleration energy) all struggle with a ton of abilities, stadiums, and competitive strategies (e.g. stall & energy denial), and these could be teched in any deck. DCE was OP at one point, when night march, rayquaza, seismitoad, and metwo's were competitive, but now, I tend to think that in expanded, DCE is essential in balancing the expanded format and to make sure that there are a wide range of viable strategies. Of course, its great to see different opinions and thats what makes the game interesting. 

[Otakutron]

Thank you for clarifying your position, @Sadra  I actually agree with a decent amount of what you said.  Where I disagree can be narrowed down to how I am convinced that a good ban list should be at least one step ahead of the players.  If a card is banned because it is causing problems already, then that's already a failure on the part of organized play.  Their job - literally - is to anticipate and prevent such things.

 

Yes, it would be nice to have clear, concise, easily quantified and qualified guidelines for a why a card should or should not be banned, but that isn't happening for a TCG, where player enjoyment itself is not so easily understood... and even if it were, where what the collective player-base enjoys can change as time passes. ;)  Even things that one would expect should not be so "fuzzy" can be because players aren't always logical operators.  A properly balanced Deck A > Deck B > Deck C > Deck A cycle can be ruined because everyone thinks Deck B is "cool", or perhaps assume it is better than it actually is, and so they play it disproportionately.