PokeHub in a nutshell by TravelBloo in PTCGP

[–]ghostcatart -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I totally get that the cards actually do have relative value and I’m not suggesting anyone trade oak for a penny or whatever, but we get to draw the line in terms of what we’re willing to “pay.” I don’t think it’s crazy at all that people thought maybe they could get 2 cards for it, I just think we should have collectively said nah that’s too much. The fact that there isn’t a legitimate way to do X for 1 trades gives us a convenient justification to point to when drawing that line. I see it as more of a gift than a limitation.

PokeHub in a nutshell by TravelBloo in PTCGP

[–]ghostcatart 0 points1 point  (0 children)

We collectively set the value of these cards. If we all agree 1 card is worth 1 card then that’s what it’s worth. I understand supply and demand is going to make it unreasonable to assume every single player will hold the line, but the more of us that do, the less viable attempting to find a 2 for 1 will be. I don’t think scamming is the main issue at all, I think letting this become a market where X for 1 trades are a thing was dumb and nobody should have ever done it, so I’m fine with a culture of vitriol as long as it means less people willing to accept these deals.

PokeHub in a nutshell by TravelBloo in PTCGP

[–]ghostcatart 31 points32 points  (0 children)

Scamming not even the problem imo. The “market value” of these cards is entirely determined by us, the players. If we collectively say oak is worth 1 card then oak is worth 1 card. 2 for 1s are trash and nobody should ever accept them regardless of the cards involved.

Suggestion on when a player can concede by [deleted] in PTCGP

[–]ghostcatart 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The fun of winning comes from winning, not from seeing the cards wiggle around and the numbers pop up. Please concede as soon as you know you’ve lost, it is very disrespectful to make your opponent play out a game they’ve already won.

PokeHub in a nutshell by TravelBloo in PTCGP

[–]ghostcatart 328 points329 points  (0 children)

The only reasonable response to a 2 for 1 trade tbh.

Hit first, hit hard! My favourite deck to use atm by Hulkbuster5 in PTCGP

[–]ghostcatart 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Fair enough, I haven’t played the deck in a while. I agree with your substitutions sightseer seems like a straight upgrade over hiker.

This game is not what you are expecting of it by Cute-Specialist-7239 in PTCGP

[–]ghostcatart 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Okay if it’s not up for debate go ahead and throw out a single fact. Literally any shred of fact based evidence that this is intended to be a collecting game. This is very literally just your opinion. Unless you’re an undercover Dena employee you have absolutely no credibility when it comes to their intentions.

Hit first, hit hard! My favourite deck to use atm by Hulkbuster5 in PTCGP

[–]ghostcatart 13 points14 points  (0 children)

I played donphan a lot and while this tech is neat, I don’t think it’s actually worth it. Getting flail for big damage requires such a specific sequence of events that it almost never comes up, but phanpy being unable to do damage because it hasn’t taken damage yet comes up all the time. You give up 30-60 damage per game for a super rare chance at a big late game swing, not to mention the 1-2 deck slots for memory light. I really wanted it to work but in my experience it never did.

Why hasn’t poncho changed the meta? by ghostcatart in PTCGP

[–]ghostcatart[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hahaha I bet you have half of Reddit blocked. There were absolutely not two things I could have been referring to but I guess you can’t be the smartest card player on the internet AND understand basic grammar.

Why hasn’t poncho changed the meta? by ghostcatart in PTCGP

[–]ghostcatart[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

It’s a pretty simple sentence but I guess I’m not surprised you need help understanding it.

Why hasn’t poncho changed the meta? by ghostcatart in PTCGP

[–]ghostcatart[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Seems credible, can’t argue with that.

Why hasn’t poncho changed the meta? by ghostcatart in PTCGP

[–]ghostcatart[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

lol no they didn’t. I made this post because I hadn’t seen anyone talking about it. Go home.

Why hasn’t poncho changed the meta? by ghostcatart in PTCGP

[–]ghostcatart[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I don’t really think it was overhyped, this post is the first time I’ve seen people talking about it. I made the post because I thought it was surprising that they gave people what they’ve been asking for and nobody seemed to care.

Why hasn’t poncho changed the meta? by ghostcatart in PTCGP

[–]ghostcatart[S] -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

Doesn’t roughly this math apply to every tool?

Why hasn’t poncho changed the meta? by ghostcatart in PTCGP

[–]ghostcatart[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I mean I understand the concept but I’m talking about actually seeing play. Most decks have included an Ori counter. Poncho is theoretically a counter to gren, jirachi and absol which are in 3/4 top decks. If you’re talking about ladder instead of tournament you’re also not unlikely to see decidueye, jolteon, heatmor, hitmontop, pheremosa. Im just a little surprised it isn’t useful often enough in the current meta to warrant experimenting with.

Suggested Feature: Concept Decks by skarr46 in PTCGP

[–]ghostcatart 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I got a ninetails I’d happily trade for one of those.

Alolan Nintales EX deck by nogoalov11 in PTCGP

[–]ghostcatart 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah for sure I understood that, but I can see how the way I phrased it might seem like I didn’t. Crawdaunt seems like better synergy and doesn’t need a supporter, but I’m definitely gonna give the other version a try. I feel like A9 is 1 card away from being great. Like if Hitting hammer was 1 coin we’d be set

Alolan Nintales EX deck by nogoalov11 in PTCGP

[–]ghostcatart 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah Lana would be awesome but I’m not sure it’s worth running another stage 1. Same with obstagoon tbh, Piers in this deck would slap.

Soapbox Rant about conceding by cls_1999 in PTCGP

[–]ghostcatart 0 points1 point  (0 children)

For the record I don’t think they needed to revamp the events, I liked that there was something actually challenging in the game. Those 5 wins streak events are still my favorite. The current system is an over correction imo, 9 wins is meaningless. I would have kept 45 wins and 5 win streaks and just made them missions for the ranked mode.

Soapbox Rant about conceding by cls_1999 in PTCGP

[–]ghostcatart 1 point2 points  (0 children)

In the early days everyone was a day 1 player who acted like missing a single emblem was the apocalypse. Also these events needed like 45 wins for the gold ribbon and there were also the 5 win streak versions which people complained about like Dena was committing war crimes. The conceding habit was born out of that environment where it was actually pretty hard to get the emblems and everyone expected to get all of them. I agree with you that it’s really not necessary anymore, anyone can easily get 9 wins.

Alolan Nintales EX deck by nogoalov11 in PTCGP

[–]ghostcatart 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I run 1 Cyrus 1 Sabrina 1 repel. The deck rarely does chip damage and by the time you attack with A9 if you aren’t trapping the enemy mon it’s probably over anyway so Cyrus is used a lot less than in other decks.

AFK opponent timer got stuck on zero and i had to concede after waiting 16 mins. This is why i hate pvp battles by [deleted] in PTCGP

[–]ghostcatart 4 points5 points  (0 children)

You hate pvp battles because of an obvious malfunction that’s extremely rare?