|
Archetype Theory
(As seen on WizPog!!!)
-Source Provided BY Gloom'
This is a special for all the people out there who think that there are about
a million different archetypes out there, and they have invented ten of them. This
might help out the average player in thinking about archetypes Every pokemon deck
out there will win in one of, or a mix of, these three ways:
Beatdown: Focus on using low cost attacks
to attack the opponent with full force as soon as possible.
Combo: Have some way to get out a set
of cards that are somehow more powerful than the individual cards put together. Like
a raindance for example.
Control: Control the opponent's actions
in some way. (i.e. stall them, disrupt them, control etc.)
Imagine these three deck types to be the corners of a triangle, as shown below.
Imagine this is a triangle. Anybody have any ideas how to fix the font on this silly
thing?
Beatdown
............/\
.........../__\
........../____\
........./______\
......../________\
......./__________\
....../____________\
...../______________\
Control Combo
[i]All decks are totally made up of these three elements in different combinations.
Imagine that a deck that is totally focused on beatdown goes at the top corner of
the pyramid. As a deck gets less focused on beatdown, it moves down the triangle,
until you get the decks which have no beatdown elements in this, which will all lie
on the bottom side of the triangle. Both combo and control work in the same way.
Every deck in existence falls on some point on this triangle.
In the beatdown corner, you have Old School Hay. In the combo corner, you get stuff like Wiggly and Raindance.
In Control, there's stuff
like Stall, Locks, and Disablers.
Decks that are a mix between these styles fall between whatever styles they use.
For example, let's take the Cleaner. The Cleaner disrupts the opponent's actions
with status effects, but focuses on doing so while getting early knockouts with said
status conditions. The Cleaner would fall on the edge between Control and Beatdown,
probably much closer to control.
Here are some examples;
Lock: This should
fall in Control, but we DO notice that it has a type of beatdown (not too specifically)
and combos so Lock should be positioned on the 3rd line up in the middle, very near
the center of the triangle.
Insanity: Ahh these
decks USED to be located w/Old School Hays but nowaday's they have adapted, they
are now closer to the center, but still have power, used correctly, the deck is hard
to beat. They can fall in Control because of the fact, thats exactly what they're
capable of, they fall near Beatdown (no explanation needed), and they fall under
combo, since they have many different possibilities.
Disabler: Ah..my
favorite, this deck is so varied, that it can work nearly all the time, there is
only one part of the disabler that fits constantly in the triangle, and that's control.
Trapper: Trapper
is shown its weakness (in theory) here, it falls under beatdown and combo, not soo
much control since the combo gives way to it. Beatdown has a weakness towards control,
while combo has an edge vs control. BUT A beatdown type deck with control would do
well, and that sounds like a hunter ^_^; But since the trapper lacks many basics.
The Hunter may have trouble. Goes to show how well the Trapper is.
Using this chart we can easily map out and try to find weaknesses of your most hated
decks
In theory the closer we get to the center, the better the deck is. However as we
get closer to the center, our abilities to max out on control/beatdown/combo lessens.
In a sense, the deck is able to counter everything, but not do it as well as the
others.
So, as you can see, everything falls in this triangle somewhere. Try to find places
for all these "new archetype" deck. It should be a snap.
To the advanced players: I'm not to sure if there is a pattern of what parts of the
triangle beat the other parts, like how people used to say that Raindance beats Hay,
Hay beats Stall, Stall beats Raindance. But im not certain anymore. Maybe decks beat
decks that fall about 120º away counter-clockwise. Any other ideas? Please post
them up.
I re-edited it and revised it to fit nowadays, but
the true contributors are:
Tedv
Kaoru Miki
|
+