I am with Aneil on this one. These changes are likely to drive lower attendance and slow or even reverse the growth of the game. Me and my son started playing TCG last year. We would go together to cups and challenges and he attended two regionals. (I did the first regional to see what it’s like but sat out the second to just focus on him.) My son is a junior and did reasonably well with the time he put in so much so that we had a plan this year on what we were willing to spend to achieve the 450 threshold so he can qualify potentially as he saw his buddies do it and was excited to do it as well. I myself thought it would be interesting to learn and when I feel I am good enough to get to the 600 threshold maybe target an invite as well so we can both go, which I thought would be coo down the line. Of course for me that was not a 2025 goal but the thought of it was enough to keep me wanting to learn. Now knowing that this is really a moving target I am just not willing to invest the time and money it takes to catch up to the players that are already good and themselves are putting in time and money. So instead of scaling up our participation this year, we will be scaling it down and just play occasionally for the fun of it. I don’t think we are an isolated case so yes, I expect participation will go down. Is it really worth it making the Worlds Pokemon this hyper competitive event at the cost of the growth of the game? I wouldn’t think so.
I agree that this change is bad for the younger divisions due to their inability to fund their play, but I'm curious why competing for a Worlds invite would be your only motivation to learn and get better? If you were going to chase a Worlds invite then you would probably have goals like Day 2 a Regional/IC, make Top 8, or something similar along the way. All these can be chased alongside or even without going for Worlds. I actually think a Worlds invite this season will take less travel/investment for those who achieve an invite than it did this season, but it will just be harder to get one since the amount of points needed will be higher. I understand the desire to qualify for Worlds since it is the big event at the end of the year, but I don't think it is healthy to centre your whole participation in Pokemon around it. We've talked about it on the pod before, but I do think theres been a large failure by TPCI to not have some other events linked to Championship Points besides Worlds. I think it leads to the Worlds or Bust mentality for a lot of players. Thanks for sharing your experience/thoughts, I appreciate hearing the perspective from the parent of a JR! - Ciaran
Re: not splitting ICs and regional best finishes into their own things, that’s seems to be them balancing competitive integrity with marketing. It looks great to the shareholders if every regional is huge, but if a ginder can afford to go to each big event then they have a money advantage towards worlds. Having an IC limit separate from regionals would possibly be more ideal, but seems unlikely to happen.
I think from a pure business angle BFLs are bad, but Pokemon has to do their best to balance business with fairness. Even if ICs had a bfl of 1 I still think people would go. The points are so big that improving your finish is probably worth it, and ICs are big events people want to compete at regardless. - Ciaran
I think the thing that would make this format change a lot more reasonable would be to add at least one mid-season tournament that requires a CP qualification. This would give more people something to qualify for (as you all have already talked about)
Forgot to note - this last season was my first after an extended break for school (and because I hated the format in 2013-2015) so my goal was to get as close to an invite as I could. I ended up with ~250 points after not getting to go to nearly as many tournaments as I wanted to (a lot fewer cups/challenges cause I work weekends frequently and only 2 regionals). My goal this year was to put my all into qualifying for worlds. This change is slightly discouraging in the sense that it will be more difficult but I like a challenge so I am going to put my all into it!
I would love a mid-season tournament you needed to qualify for. I think they should maybe region lock them, otherwise you're making mini worlds and forcing people to travel. Maybe the champions of each of these region tournaments could play a show match or become the "Elite 4" similar to what Japan does. Best of luck on your invite chase this year.. It will probably be difficult, but makes it even more rewarding when you finally start seeing results! - Ciaran
@@ShiftGearPodcast love the decreased significance of locals, (slightly) increased prizing, and match point change. The main thing that I’m hung up on is having IC’s and SPE’s both counting towards the BFL of 6. I think capping it at 1 IC, 5 or so regionals, and lowering the points for SPE’s would have been a welcomed change
I agree that worlds should be the way to see which player is the best of that competitive year. I think boosting regional and IC points at the top end specifically makes sense, because if you do well at multiple of those you are more likely to be one of the best players of that year. I think lowering cup and challenge points also makes sense. There are a few guys at my locals who consistently do well, like if they don’t get top four at an event people ask them if they are feeling alright types of players. But then almost none of those guys consistently make day 2 at regionals, let alone get a brag worthy top placement. There is a massive difference in skill needed to be “the best player in five stores” VS “one of the best in the world, and lowering Cup and Challenge points is a way for TPC to show they recognize the difference of scale. I’m sure stores won’t love this change if it results in fewer people attending events because they might lose money, but there is no guarantee that will happen because Cups and Challenges can still be good ways to practice for those larger events. You can’t only grind the PTCGL ladder and expect to do well in person, you still have to play physical games of tcg and these worlds point changes won’t affect that. What might happen is people will be even more incentivized to make play testing groups and bring the same or similar decks to Cups and Challenges for irl testing, but that also remains to be seen. To address the financial side: money will always be a factor. Having a lower but still reasonable BFL removes some of the benefits of money and makes the game more about skill. Now you can’t just go to every regional and IC and farm your worlds invite that way, you have to actually do well to become a top player in your region. And isn’t that what worlds is about? Watching competition between the top players of each region? Maybe the extension of this conversation should be “how can we get more games streamed at each large event so the audience can get more chances to watch more high caliber Pokemon?”
I pretty much agree with everything you said. I understand everyones concern about attendance issues if you de-value local, but I think most locals get players because they just love playing Pokemon. I'll be interested to see how everyone feels about this change at the end of next season. - Ciaran
We put in the work for our listeners! Aneil and I both love making content and interacting with our community so was a no brainer to make the double whammy this week! - Ciaran
Huge agree with Ciaran's closing thoughts, the players sitting down at round one of Worlds should all be players that are confident that they can actually win Worlds
I understand it isn't everyones mentality, but I could never imagine playing Worlds without thinking I have a shot at taking the whole thing down! - Ciaran
The CP payout of regionals is so huge. I always thought that it was so weird that you could get top 64 at a 2000+ player regional and get as many points as someone who won their 12 person t4 cut League Cup
The prize pack changes are a pretty big hit to the lower divisions, particularly juniors. Winning packs is very meaningful to new young players, and this is a pretty significant reduction.
@@ShiftGearPodcast Since the pack prizing is now based on attendance and the lower divisions have significantly fewer participants, the average tournament will award less than half as many packs - 1,080 instead of 2,592. Larger tournaments (128-256) will be a bit better awarding 1,584 packs, but still a lot less. It probably has the biggest impact on the lower end of the placements (17-64) since that is where new players with their first real finish are likely to end up and who generally care the most about pack prizing.
My goal is still to win or day a regional. Worlds is cool, but if I don't get there, it's whatever. The BFL for locals is good because now people will be able to compete and not go overboard on getting the points. Some people's goals are worlds or bust. I just want to be a champion and validate my investment into this game.
Unless you have $15000 to gamble qualifying from Western Canada certainly isn't attainable, but we already knew that going in. My idea was to move away from CP based invites, and give invites for top 8 (top 16 maybe? Or how about top8+ anyone who makes asymmetrical cut) for regionals and then top 64 for ICs. CP would be given only to local events with each region (state/province) having their own leaderboard and only events from that region count towards their leaderboard.
I think having invites tied to placements at tournaments is the most fair way to eliminate cost. Maybe keep top X but lower it to 85 or something with pass downs so we still get ~125 invites. This way if someone can only go to a few tournaments then they have a chance to qualify if they do really well. - Ciaran
I think the problem to a lot of people will be the investment needed VS how much they think they can compete in the biggest stage. There are people that have the skills and competence, but don't have the money to travel that much to something so uncertain. For those people, the investment to attend regionals and internationals weights a lot. I like the idea of worlds being more exclusive, but I guess there going to be a lot of great talent left off because of how much it will cost for them
This is why I am a huge proponent of extending the auto invites to Top 8 at majors or do alternate qualifying paths. If you are truly an elite player and perform at these events then you should be rewarded. I do think there is no way to ever truly solve the cost problem, but the amount of importance they continue to put on ICs isn't helping. - Ciaran
BFL means best finish limit. So if the BFL is 4 they take your best 4 finishes at that tournament type. If you go to 6 League Cups and finish 1st, 1st, 2nd, 2nd, 3rd, 3rd. The 3rd place finishes wouldn't give you points. - Ciaran
I am with Aneil on this one. These changes are likely to drive lower attendance and slow or even reverse the growth of the game. Me and my son started playing TCG last year. We would go together to cups and challenges and he attended two regionals. (I did the first regional to see what it’s like but sat out the second to just focus on him.) My son is a junior and did reasonably well with the time he put in so much so that we had a plan this year on what we were willing to spend to achieve the 450 threshold so he can qualify potentially as he saw his buddies do it and was excited to do it as well. I myself thought it would be interesting to learn and when I feel I am good enough to get to the 600 threshold maybe target an invite as well so we can both go, which I thought would be coo down the line. Of course for me that was not a 2025 goal but the thought of it was enough to keep me wanting to learn. Now knowing that this is really a moving target I am just not willing to invest the time and money it takes to catch up to the players that are already good and themselves are putting in time and money. So instead of scaling up our participation this year, we will be scaling it down and just play occasionally for the fun of it. I don’t think we are an isolated case so yes, I expect participation will go down. Is it really worth it making the Worlds Pokemon this hyper competitive event at the cost of the growth of the game? I wouldn’t think so.
I agree that this change is bad for the younger divisions due to their inability to fund their play, but I'm curious why competing for a Worlds invite would be your only motivation to learn and get better? If you were going to chase a Worlds invite then you would probably have goals like Day 2 a Regional/IC, make Top 8, or something similar along the way. All these can be chased alongside or even without going for Worlds. I actually think a Worlds invite this season will take less travel/investment for those who achieve an invite than it did this season, but it will just be harder to get one since the amount of points needed will be higher. I understand the desire to qualify for Worlds since it is the big event at the end of the year, but I don't think it is healthy to centre your whole participation in Pokemon around it. We've talked about it on the pod before, but I do think theres been a large failure by TPCI to not have some other events linked to Championship Points besides Worlds. I think it leads to the Worlds or Bust mentality for a lot of players. Thanks for sharing your experience/thoughts, I appreciate hearing the perspective from the parent of a JR! - Ciaran
Re: not splitting ICs and regional best finishes into their own things, that’s seems to be them balancing competitive integrity with marketing. It looks great to the shareholders if every regional is huge, but if a ginder can afford to go to each big event then they have a money advantage towards worlds.
Having an IC limit separate from regionals would possibly be more ideal, but seems unlikely to happen.
I think from a pure business angle BFLs are bad, but Pokemon has to do their best to balance business with fairness. Even if ICs had a bfl of 1 I still think people would go. The points are so big that improving your finish is probably worth it, and ICs are big events people want to compete at regardless. - Ciaran
I think the thing that would make this format change a lot more reasonable would be to add at least one mid-season tournament that requires a CP qualification. This would give more people something to qualify for (as you all have already talked about)
Forgot to note - this last season was my first after an extended break for school (and because I hated the format in 2013-2015) so my goal was to get as close to an invite as I could. I ended up with ~250 points after not getting to go to nearly as many tournaments as I wanted to (a lot fewer cups/challenges cause I work weekends frequently and only 2 regionals). My goal this year was to put my all into qualifying for worlds. This change is slightly discouraging in the sense that it will be more difficult but I like a challenge so I am going to put my all into it!
I would love a mid-season tournament you needed to qualify for. I think they should maybe region lock them, otherwise you're making mini worlds and forcing people to travel. Maybe the champions of each of these region tournaments could play a show match or become the "Elite 4" similar to what Japan does.
Best of luck on your invite chase this year.. It will probably be difficult, but makes it even more rewarding when you finally start seeing results! - Ciaran
🚨🚨Emergency pod hype🚨🚨
Some positive changes, more negative, though.
What do you think are the positive and negative changes? - Ciaran
@@ShiftGearPodcast love the decreased significance of locals, (slightly) increased prizing, and match point change. The main thing that I’m hung up on is having IC’s and SPE’s both counting towards the BFL of 6. I think capping it at 1 IC, 5 or so regionals, and lowering the points for SPE’s would have been a welcomed change
I agree that worlds should be the way to see which player is the best of that competitive year.
I think boosting regional and IC points at the top end specifically makes sense, because if you do well at multiple of those you are more likely to be one of the best players of that year.
I think lowering cup and challenge points also makes sense. There are a few guys at my locals who consistently do well, like if they don’t get top four at an event people ask them if they are feeling alright types of players.
But then almost none of those guys consistently make day 2 at regionals, let alone get a brag worthy top placement. There is a massive difference in skill needed to be “the best player in five stores” VS “one of the best in the world, and lowering Cup and Challenge points is a way for TPC to show they recognize the difference of scale.
I’m sure stores won’t love this change if it results in fewer people attending events because they might lose money, but there is no guarantee that will happen because Cups and Challenges can still be good ways to practice for those larger events. You can’t only grind the PTCGL ladder and expect to do well in person, you still have to play physical games of tcg and these worlds point changes won’t affect that.
What might happen is people will be even more incentivized to make play testing groups and bring the same or similar decks to Cups and Challenges for irl testing, but that also remains to be seen.
To address the financial side: money will always be a factor. Having a lower but still reasonable BFL removes some of the benefits of money and makes the game more about skill. Now you can’t just go to every regional and IC and farm your worlds invite that way, you have to actually do well to become a top player in your region.
And isn’t that what worlds is about? Watching competition between the top players of each region?
Maybe the extension of this conversation should be “how can we get more games streamed at each large event so the audience can get more chances to watch more high caliber Pokemon?”
I pretty much agree with everything you said. I understand everyones concern about attendance issues if you de-value local, but I think most locals get players because they just love playing Pokemon. I'll be interested to see how everyone feels about this change at the end of next season. - Ciaran
respect to you guys for making an episode this quickly double whammy shift gear week
We put in the work for our listeners! Aneil and I both love making content and interacting with our community so was a no brainer to make the double whammy this week! - Ciaran
Huge agree with Ciaran's closing thoughts, the players sitting down at round one of Worlds should all be players that are confident that they can actually win Worlds
I understand it isn't everyones mentality, but I could never imagine playing Worlds without thinking I have a shot at taking the whole thing down! - Ciaran
The CP payout of regionals is so huge. I always thought that it was so weird that you could get top 64 at a 2000+ player regional and get as many points as someone who won their 12 person t4 cut League Cup
Agreed, it never made much sense. Locals are the hardest tournament to balance so I'm glad the weighting is getting shifted to the majors. - Ciaran
The prize pack changes are a pretty big hit to the lower divisions, particularly juniors. Winning packs is very meaningful to new young players, and this is a pretty significant reduction.
Did they reduce packs for the younger age divisions? I thought they added more, but I'm not sure what the structure was before. - Ciaran
@@ShiftGearPodcast Since the pack prizing is now based on attendance and the lower divisions have significantly fewer participants, the average tournament will award less than half as many packs - 1,080 instead of 2,592. Larger tournaments (128-256) will be a bit better awarding 1,584 packs, but still a lot less. It probably has the biggest impact on the lower end of the placements (17-64) since that is where new players with their first real finish are likely to end up and who generally care the most about pack prizing.
You will not be seeing Charles Debreton chasing invite this year. These changes are OUTRAGEOUS!!
I don't think I've ever seen Charles Debreton chase a Worlds invite.... - Ciaran
My goal is still to win or day a regional. Worlds is cool, but if I don't get there, it's whatever. The BFL for locals is good because now people will be able to compete and not go overboard on getting the points. Some people's goals are worlds or bust. I just want to be a champion and validate my investment into this game.
Those are great goals and hopefully you can complete the invite one day! - Ciaran
Unless you have $15000 to gamble qualifying from Western Canada certainly isn't attainable, but we already knew that going in.
My idea was to move away from CP based invites, and give invites for top 8 (top 16 maybe? Or how about top8+ anyone who makes asymmetrical cut) for regionals and then top 64 for ICs.
CP would be given only to local events with each region (state/province) having their own leaderboard and only events from that region count towards their leaderboard.
I think having invites tied to placements at tournaments is the most fair way to eliminate cost. Maybe keep top X but lower it to 85 or something with pass downs so we still get ~125 invites. This way if someone can only go to a few tournaments then they have a chance to qualify if they do really well. - Ciaran
I think the problem to a lot of people will be the investment needed VS how much they think they can compete in the biggest stage. There are people that have the skills and competence, but don't have the money to travel that much to something so uncertain. For those people, the investment to attend regionals and internationals weights a lot. I like the idea of worlds being more exclusive, but I guess there going to be a lot of great talent left off because of how much it will cost for them
This is why I am a huge proponent of extending the auto invites to Top 8 at majors or do alternate qualifying paths. If you are truly an elite player and perform at these events then you should be rewarded. I do think there is no way to ever truly solve the cost problem, but the amount of importance they continue to put on ICs isn't helping. - Ciaran
@@ShiftGearPodcasttotally agree with you here
Trust I will just win my first senior reginol probbaly Sacramento
I have faith you will! - Ciaran
feelsbadman kinda sad changes no real effort put in no benefit for anything really
Definitely feels like they did a big shake up without really addressing the core problems. - Ciaran
Im a new player can someone give bfl to me plz
BFL means best finish limit. So if the BFL is 4 they take your best 4 finishes at that tournament type. If you go to 6 League Cups and finish 1st, 1st, 2nd, 2nd, 3rd, 3rd. The 3rd place finishes wouldn't give you points. - Ciaran
@@ShiftGearPodcast awesome thank you