First draft written end of November 2024

As a first draft, this article aims to summarize the brief history of the Pokemon Trading Card Game format Base-Fossil Point-Buy and offer possible scenarios to accelerate changes to the points list so that it more accurately reflects the intended “goals and spirit” of the format. It includes the author’s opinions and biases on several topics which welcome any counterpoints. Eventually, it will be broken down into smaller articles based on topic.

Chat room conversation has propelled the format for over a year and created a rich gameplay experience, but the Discord conversation medium leads to difficult review of discussion topics. In addition to my opinions, this piece will endeavor to (1) showcase those topics and other information in an organized manner and (2) provide concise topics for further conversation.

If you read this and have additional topics to add (or would like to add to existing topics), please let me know, and I will work to get them integrated. This is a living document (and should continue to be updated as new opinions are introduced). Thanks for reading and contributing (and please excuse my biases)!

And a big thank you to (1) the Pokemon 1999 Discord Admins for facilitating events, organizing voting and listening to hundreds of lines of opinions and (2) the Pokemon 1999 Discord Players putting their energies into pondering, discussing and playing the format.

Introduction to (Base-Fossil) Point Buy

I understand that Base-Fossil Point-Buy is a descendant of Japan’s Hall of Fame format. Others have covered the present-day Hall of Fame format in detail and give great insight into the origin and growth the format, but for the discussion of Base-Fossil Point Buy, I think it’s important to know that the Hall of Fame format’s intent was to create a format where the highest-powered cards of Base-Neo were restricted in total number.

I only know of Base-Fossil Point-Buy from the Pokemon 1999 Discord (Webcam leagues organized through Limitless). Under the current approach (December 2024), players are afforded 8 total points to spend on adding pointed cards to their deck. Each copy of a card costs zero points if it is not on the list or the indicated number of points according to its list position.

“Currently” (2025.04.11), the format uses WotC errata for paper play but TCGOne has implemented Japanese errata (AUTHOR NOTE: I will update if this changes to a uniform approach), and the point list, active from July 2025 to September 2025, is as follows:

 

From poking around Discord message history, it appears that the format was discussed at the end of 2020, but the spark that ignited the coalescence of a point list was in the middle of 2023. And the kindling was this post in the #point-buy-base-fossil Pokemon 1999 Discord channel:

Ojama — 8/23/2023 7:26 AM

this is my first idea of base fossil 8 point buy, obv its just the first look without any practice, lemme know if someone its interested or have some suggestions to implement

What is the “Spirit of Point Buy”?

The point-buy concept adds a new opportunity cost to deck-building in the Base-Fossil format: settling to play cards that are pointed preclude playing other cards of equal or lesser points. Assuming a well-balanced point list approach, this opportunity cost gives players a lot of variety to construct a viable deck. 

In this section, I’ll highlight some community inputs and then offer my interpretation of the format.

Early Discord Conversations

I copied some conversational pieces from Discord that I’ve used to inform my opinion on Point-Buy’s focus.

pg8 — 12/23/2020 11:55 AM

my only goal for a nonsense format would be “create a version of 99 in which the majority of games are decided by prize cards”

Darmine Doggie Door — 5/8/2023 1:35 PM

I think if you’re just building a gauntlet of decks to play against each other then you’re better off just balancing them against each other rather than sticking to a specific ban/pointlist. Anytime you make a pointlist competitive players will still do their best to optimize within it.

Carnval — 8/23/2023 8:14 AM

The thing is just don’t like seeing my opponent going through their deck throughout the whole entire game. It’s not fun to watch but if you think Oak isn’t the cause the to it then I’m ok with it.

occasionalgamer — 8/23/2023 8:15 AM

That’s just Pokémon in general though isn’t it?

Pokémon has always been a game with high draw power

And imo it needs it because playing energy down every turn and evolving drops your hand size very quickly and you need to fill it back up to keep doing things

As for this point buy list, if oak costs points such that a deck with blastoise or venusaur or alakazam or etc can’t afford to run oak, I think the format will just deteriorate into hyper efficient basics dominating (again) because they don’t need to fill their hand back up so badly to keep playing, unlike evolution decks

ZeroChaos — 8/23/2023 10:42 AM

If Hitmonchan & Electabuzz get to be powerful in combination with other powerful decks then that’s a good thing.

We don’t want zero powerful things to be playable.  We just want to open the environment up to more strategies.

Rocket thanaSOS — 8/25/2023 1:42 PM

As we said, we need to diversify the format. Already good cards with are value for energies and turns are not healthy against the other decks

Ojama — 9/14/2023 1:43 PM

If no one plays energy removal and most of the big evo are at no points, the format is gonna be the faster who can get out with the main monster, just wins

pinecone — 9/14/2023 2:15 PM

If Gust is at 2, it’s possible, but I think Gust at 1 helps a lot there.

Also in general I don’t love when people are reluctant to try things that are trying to correct things that already exist, because of like, speculation as to how it will play out. To some extent we have to, but let’s see the metagame we fear might come to pass in order to figure out exactly how to regulate it?

Ojama — 9/15/2023 11:41 AM

Distributing points in a list just changes the way you will play This doesn’t mean it’s bad or good, but just to the players preferences, just that

VisioN — 9/15/2023 11:57 AM

Right, but with so many different preferences it would be nice to have something objective to this server.

jiffy — 9/15/2023 12:10 PM

as in we don’t have any input on it

i can see the benefit of a list managed by a 3rd party, but i think there’s a lot of good that can come from a larger scale collaborative effort from the community.

obviously we won’t always 100% agree on everything, but i think discussions and compromises can help

Ojama — 9/15/2023 12:14 PM

Sure, im the first one who wanna improve the format so im in for some changes

I still think we should proceed from our list and then make some adjustments

jiffy — 9/15/2023 12:34 PM

something i think that will help PB balancing discussions, is more talking about what we want the list to promote/inhibit. if we can agree on general concepts like that, deciding which cards should be what points should come fairly simply. so far i’m pretty sure we all want stage 2 decks to be viable and reduce “degeneracy” like aero/muk, mewtwo stall, lickitung stall, etc from there it’s how nerfed do we want regular BF type decks like rain, venu, arcanine, etc

VisioN — 9/15/2023 1:45 PM

I chatted with Jason on point buy theory in general and he had some interesting input. 

[excerpt from Jason convo screenshot]

“I think it’s challenging, if not impossible to construct a format where everyone agrees on what’s restricted and what’s not. […] the only thing you’d need to remove to create a very different format would be Super Energy Removal. […] Sure, you can restrict the best Evolutions, […] but then others will take over as the new best. […] People don’t realize a lot of cards’ strength comes from other cards.”

Recent (November 2024) Discord Google Survey

Additionally, in November 2024, a survey was conducted to gather opinions of players. 8 players responded, the author included, and our responses are listed below! (When prudent, future surveys may be conducted and amended to this article or resultant in a new article referencing this one.)

PTCG is most fun when…

• 75% – All games follow the same interactive flow of back-and-forth
• 12.5% – Games follow a variety of patterns
• 12.5% – Don’t feel strongly either way

On pointing:

• 37.5% – Cards should be pointed high ONLY if they are oppressive/ubiquitous
• 50% – Cards should ALSO be pointed high if they are not fun to play against, or out of principle
• 12.5% – Don’t feel strongly either way

Should some cards be banned from point-buy?

• 12.5% – Yes
• 87.5% – No
• 0% – Don’t feel strongly either way

Point-buy should provide…

Author’s note: I read “fixed” as similar decks but restricted usage of key cards and “alternative” as different play patterns/decks (more focus on building up benched Pokemon and managing the active Pokemon to provide counters to the opponent). Ultimately, I think that alternative versus fixed does not provide a strong distinction and that answers to other questions (what is the point-buy spirit, how to improve the format, etc.) provide a better insight.

• 67.5% – A “fixed” base-fossil metagame
• 12.5% – An “alternative” base-fossil metagame
• 25% – Don’t feel strongly either way

The month-to-month point-buy metagame should be…

• 75% – Dynamic, with votes reigning in dominant strategies and buffing lesser-played ones
• 12.5% – Static, with a pool of up to 10 viable decks that does not really change
• 12.5% – Don’t feel strongly either way

The goals of point-buy management should be…

• 50% – Accessibility to newcomers
• 100% – Diverse metagame (strategies)
• 62.5% – Diverse cards pool (high percentage of legal pool is useable)
• 12.5% – Stage 2 Pokemon better than Stage 1 better than Basics
• 12.5% – Charizard is a cool card

What is the “spirit” of point-buy (or its purpose)?

• an environment where mons who would never see the light of day in b-f are playable. allow players to use those mons and their fav cards in a competitive setting.
• To trust and love unused mons
• Allow for a wide array of playable strategies. Encourage unique deckbuilding.
• Players should find success evolving many of the Gen 1 Pokemon and have agency to make meaningful Pokemon-centric actions during most of their turns. Decks should maintain a variety of Pokemon. Format should be relatively easy for new players to start playing.
• Enabling as many cards as possible that are unplayable/bad in regular base fossil to become playable/good in this format. Also, providing a gameplay experience that is (usually) vastly different from the (often-times) miserable vanilla base fossil experience of getting bombarded by “unfun” cards like energy removal, SER, and lass, or having complete non-games because of floodgates like aerodactyl and muk.
• Play the game as the developer wanted it. Evolve Pokemon to get the upper hand. Stage 2 better tan Stage 1 better than basics. (As close as we can get)
• Fossil without energy removal
• An refreshing alternative way to play BF where the “best decks” are reigned in to allow the lesser used pokemon (particularly evo lines) are at the forefront. and no licki stall

How could the format better achieve that purpose?

• free cards that have never proven oppressive and find through trial and error where they truly belong on the list, like we do for most of the cards here.
• Looking at what’s widely played and pointing it (ie zard, gengar, buzz) the meta should be diverse and fresh
• Point dominant cards so that the decks utilizing them are roughly as powerful as decks using weaker cards (to an acceptable degree)
• Points should be used to restrict # copies of cards and combinations of cards played in a deck. An introduction to Point-Buy should be created, featuring the points list (history of points nice-to-have), some text on goals of format and links to Limitless deck lists.
• A more granular point list. I.E. more points total, or introducing some half point tiers like 0.5 or 1.5 points.
• Point cards that are against the spirit of point buy high enough to balance it.
• Keep point list minimal
• more people playing and experimenting with under represented strategies

What makes Point-Buy fun?

• the excitement of a new metagame every few months, constant brewing and innovation, getting to cook up new decks and seeing what other players come up with within the restrictions.
• Seeing new strategies and divergence from standard b-f
• Succeeding with previously underplayed/forgotten cards.
• Variety in cards played to winning outcomes and players having a high agency. The overly effective disruptive cards and the highly efficient offensive cards are played in controlled volumes. Ideally almost every card in Base-Fossil would have some application (and the format would feel enjoyable to both players).
• The lack of energy removal/lass spam, the lack of non games from muk and aerodactyl, the variety in Pokémon seen compared to vanilla base fossil. Getting to win games with cards like Charizard, Vileplume, venusaur, Gengar, etc is really cool.
• You can play Pokemon that otherwhise wouldn’t be good enough. Like Raichu.
• Seeing decks that aren’t viable in regular fossil
• the dynamic of the list changing every quarter keeps it feeling fresh and unsolved

How could point-buy be improved?

• list adjusted so that nothing is soft-banned that hasn’t proven it deserves it.
• A wider point pool to help hone the meta
• Add points to limit the power of dominant decks.
• More granularity added to the points list. With 8 points, changing a single point pushes a card from playable to soft-banned or as a role-player/underpowered/softbanned to ubiquitous. Ten, twelve or fifteen points would all offer more granularity when pointing cards.
• A more granular list that does a better job of enabling 0 point attackers to see more viable play. This means cards like nidoking, nidoqueen, Machamp, poliwrath, eeveelutions, Zapdos, rapidash, Sandslash etc. Basically just widening the meta
• 12 or 16 points list to balance more precise
• Smaller list
• more games, more innovation, more voting. rinse repeat

Should There Be a Stated Goal of the Format?

Coming to consensus: should there be a unified vision for point-buy format? My opinion is yes, there should be, but I understand some may feel no, voting by participants is enough.

My main concern is that if goals are not stated, though the pointed cards lead to a vision, players may join, vote for another vision, have no impact, and leave dissatisfied. Alternatively, they may join and get enough other active players to change the vision. Existing active, inactive or new players may come back with the first vision or a third vision… 

The articulation of goals would set expectations and inform the community where companion format(s) may be needed to achieve a different experience (or if the goals need to be revised). In the November 2024 survey and throughout the initial conversations, there appears to be recurring themes of variety in competitive decks and playing cards that are not competitive in Base-Fossil.

Why goals may hinder the format is worth consideration as well. Avid Point-Buy participant ZeroChaos summarized this concern: “[…]goals can be helpful, I just worry they will become too emphasized.  It’s very easy to, once those things are “decided” (and remember that those things reflect an opinion that likely has and will change over time), use them to actively or passively push out players that don’t agree with them or want something else.”

My Opinion Informed Through All of The Above and The Below

Concisely, I believe that players are looking for Point-Buy format to provide agency to make decisions with Pokemon while playing with a large diversity of cards (giving players greater agency when selecting cards for their deck). This would be different from the traditional Base-Fossil format primarily through: (1) stall needing win through play patterns that are more able to be disrupted, (2) attack-focused decks not having consistent OHKO and (3) the strongest Pokemon and interactive Trainers being played in less aggregated quantity. How this goal is achieved could be through the following:

• Diversity through balance – A mostly static points list may achieve diversity through offering an equal opportunity cost to the higher power cards (or those that are higher powered in groups) such that they cannot be played in volume to fill an entire deck list. 
  • Pointing combinations that easily lock an opponent out of the game, reducing consistency/velocity for assembling repeatable one-or-two-hit-knock-out/energy deprivation attacks and generally pointing the most efficient cards will facilitate this tenet.
  • By not changing the points list as intensely and/or as frequently, a larger population of competitive decks could coalesce (making it easier for existing players to understand comparable power levels, a metagame, and for new players to see how decks are successfully or unsuccessfully built). 
• Disruption over locks – occasionalgamer said it well: “It sounds like ideally, there shouldn’t be too many scenarios where you’re locked out of the game until you find X specific trainer”. I’ll add “there shouldn’t be too many scenarios where your opponent can disrupt more than a few turns in a row by using Pokemon and/or playing Trainers”. These two scenarios undermine the goal of giving players agency. Ideally, points would enable players to have a healthy amount of interaction but not facilitate oppressive play patterns (by mostly removing the opponent’s agency).
  • Muk, Aerodacytl, Alakazam, Slowbro, Mr. Mime, Lickitung, Psyduck, Lass, Gust of Wind, Scoop Up, the Energy Removal cards, etc., are pointed to reduce the trainer-required-to-escape lock scenarios. 
  • Repeated healing (Pokemon Center, Scoop Up, Defender, Super Potion, Alakazam, Slowbro, etc.) combined with a high-damage or energy-removing attacker has proven to create a soft lock against decks that cannot reliably OHKO (or two-hit KO). Arcanine is strong because of this; Charizard, Ninetales, Electabuzz, Clefable and Venusaur as well. I assume that energy-removing attackers (like Dragonair or Golduck) are weaker than the attackers that OHKO, but they still reduce agency. It is clear to point power outliers like Scoop Up, Slowbro, Pokemon Center and Alakazam. Instead of pointing Super Potion, Defender, etc., players have looked to point Pokemon best capable of leveraging healing to reduce these softer lock scenarios. 
• Consider the aggregate – as Jason Klaczynski stated, “a lot of cards’ strength[s] come from other cards.” These combinations must be considered when assigning or deciding to not assign points to singular cards. 
  • When considering decks, pointing individual Pokemon will reduce the potential power of decks that play that type of energy (or of all decks if the Pokemon does not need colored energy to be affective).
  • Cards shouldn’t be “soft-banned” due to costing too many points, but rather groups of cards should be banned by costing too many points. I assume this is a lot tougher to implement than it is to type.

A Brief History of Points

After initial discussions in August 2023, members of the Discord agreed to a points list up to 8 points. After the first list, a voting system was implemented for changing points (and adding or removing cards). The first three votes happened monthly since the first list was creating with much play experience, then the voting changed to a quarterly cadence.

As each Discord member that played in a Point-Buy league is able to vote on point changes, the points list is influenced more by individuals’ views on each card than some primarily objective inputs, reinforcing Jason’s comment: “it’s challenging, if not impossible to construct a format where everyone agrees on what’s restricted and what’s not”. 

The following sections show points lists from the past (and some Japanese lists for the Game Boy game).

Japanese GB “point buy”

A Japanese Gameboy PTCG League using Hall of Fame approach was shared while discussing what point assignment could potentially be. As this format has a slightly different card pool than Base-Fossil, I have not explored how the decks have performed or the points list has changed. These points lists are here as references as they were shared as knowledge inputs for the Base-Fossil Point-Buy Points List.

September 2023 (Initial List)

Ojama — 8/23/2023 9:55 AM

so, updated list, cool with that?

September 2023 Winner: Dragonite-Slowbro

• Points: 1x Dodrio (1 pt), 1x Mewtwo [Promo] (1 pt), 2x Pokemon Center (2 pts), 4x Double Colorless Energy (4 pts)

Total Points Spent:

User Suggested changes end of Sept 2023

After a single league, some Discord users provided their view of the points list. I have not looked into the full points suggestions, but I did note that the four strongest cards that disrupt or lock the opponent out of making meaningful decisions with their Pokemon are all highly pointed (Aerodactyl, Muk, Super Energy Removal, Lass) while Pokemon with some of the strongest damage-manipulating or energy-manipulating powers are moderately pointed (Alakazam, Blastoise, Venusaur, Mr. Mime).

From Jiffy: this is my personal opinion. what do you all think? Aero +1: antithesis to the PB’s goal SER +1: preventative measure to balance ER to 0, also prevents lick + SER in the same deck GOW -1: adds counter play to bench sitters and adds interactivity Arcanine +1: very strong card even without buzzap Buzz +1: a one energy haymaker with a status effect, promotes diversity Magmar +1: a one energy haymaker with a status effect, promotes diversity ER -1: promotes interactivity, makes DCE less oppressive on big guys, kills mewtwo mystic mine

From: Ojama

From Ooda

From occasionalgamer

October 2023 revision

For this revision, there were 8 Total Votes: 8 (5 votes needed to pass). 

• Aerodactyl: 3 up 0 down 
• Muk: 1 up 0 down Super Energy Removal: 1 up 0 down 
• Alakazam: 0 up 2 down 
• Blastoise: 0 up 1 down 
• Lickitung: 1 up 2 down 
• Item Finder: 0 up 2 down 
• Scyther (points reduced): 0 up 6 down 
• Wigglytuff: 0 up 4 down 
• Venusaur (points reduced): 0 up 6 down 
• Ditto: 0 up 1 down 
• Mr. Mime: 2 up 0 down 
• Computer Search (points reduced): 0 up 5 down 
• Gust of Wind (points reduced): 0 up 8 down 
• Kangaskhan: 0 up 2 down 
• Gastly: 0 up 1 down 
• Psyduck: 1 up 0 down 
• Mewtwo: 0 up 1 down 
• PlusPower: 0 up 2 down 
• Pokemon Breeder: 0 up 3 down 
• Arcanine (points increased): 6 up
• Electabuzz: 2 up 
• Magmar: 2 up

October 2023: Fire Charizard

• Points: 2x Energy Removal (2 pts), 2x Gust of Wind (2 pts), 4x Double Colorless Energy (4 pts)
• Beating: Electabuzz-Hitmonchan Step In/Retreat Aid, Arcanine-Slowbro, Golduck-Gyarados, Poliwrath-Dragonair

Points Spent:

November 2023 revision

2023 November: Clefable Lightning

• Points: 4x Clefable (4 pts), 4x Energy Removal (4 pts)
• Beating: Buzzap Raichu-Zapdos, VenuCenter-Mr.Mime, Poliwrath-Golduck

Points Spent:

December 2023 revision

2023 December: Alakazam-Mr. Mime-Tentacool Box

• Points: 1x Alakazam (3 pts), 2x Tentacool (2 pts), 1x Mr. Mime (2 pts), 1x Computer Search (1 pt)
• Beating: Buzzap Raichu, Buzzap Eggs, Rain Dance Charizard 

January 2024 revision

January 2024: Buzzap-Raichu

• Points: 3x Electrode (3 pts), 2x Gust of Wind (2 pts), 2x PlusPower (2 pts), 1x Computer Search (1 pt)
• Beating: Raichu-Electabuzz-Haunter, Hitmonchan-Electabuzz-Mewtwo-Mew, Buzzap Charizard

February 2024: Clefable-Hitmonchan

• Points: 3x Clefable (6 pts), 2x Gust of Wind (2 pts)
• Beating: Raichu-Electabuzz-Haunter, Hitmonchan-Electabuzz-Mewtwo-Mew, Buzzap Charizard

March 2024: Clefable-Hitmonchan

• Points: 2x Clefable (4 pts), 3x Gust of Wind (3 pts), 1x Computer Search (1 pt)
• Beating: Buzzap Ninetales, Buzzap Raichu, Poliwrath-Pidgeot

Points Spent:

Ooda 12-pt example Feb 2024

An example of what a 12-point list might look like given the point distribution in Feb. 2024

March 2024 revision

new point list! Total votes: 10 (6 to pass) 

• Passed: Electrode 1pt > 2pt (7 votes up) Clefable 2pt > 3pt (8 votes up) 
• Did not pass: Arcanine (1 vote down) Chansey (2 votes down) Comp Search (1 vote up) Ditto (1 vote up) Dragonair (4 votes down) Energy Removal (1 vote down) Gust of Wind (1 vote up, 1 vote down) Item Finder (1 vote up) Lass (1 vote down) Lickitung (2 votes down) Mewtwo (2 votes down) Super Energy Removal (1 vote down) Haunter FO (1 vote to add)

April 2024: Alakazam-Mr. Mime-Tentacool Box

• Points: 1x Alakazam (3 pts), 1x Mr. Mime (3 pts), 1x Tentacool (1 pt), 1x Gust of Wind (1 pt)
• Beating: Vileplume-Mr. Mime Retreat Aid, Poliwrath-Pidgeot, Charizard-Haunter

May 2024: Rain Dance

• Points: 1x Blastoise (3 pts), 3x Computer Search (3 pts), 2x Gust of Wind (2 pts)
• Beating: Fighting Machamp Removal, Beedrill-Muk, Buzzap Ninetales

June 2024: Zapdos Buzzap

• Points: 2x Electrode (4 pts), 4x Gust of Wind (4 pts)
• Beating: Wigglytuff Grass Psychic, Fighting Electabuzz-Kangaskhan,
  Losing to: Alakazam-Mr. Mime-Tentacool Box

Points Spent:

June 2024 revision

7 votes cast, 4 votes to move a card
Alakazam: 4 up
Chansey: 2 down
Dragonair: 3 down
Energy Removal: 1 down
Lickitung: 3 down
Mewtwo: 7 down
Mr. Mime: 2 up
Pluspower: 3 down
Scyther: 1 down
Tentacool: 1 up
Venusaur: 5 down
Wigglytuff: 2 down, 1 up
Haunter: 1 up

July 2024: Arcanine-Magmar

• Points: 3x Arcanine (3 pts), 2x Gust of Wind (2 pts), 3x Double Colorless Energy (3 pts)
• Beating: Charizard-Blastoise, Fire Colorless Toolbox, Fire Charizard-Dragonair

August 2024: Arcanine-Magmar

• Points: 3x Arcanine (3 pts), 1x Gust of Wind (1 pt), 4x Double Colorless Energy (4 pts)
• Beating: VenuCenter, Mewtwo-Hitmonchan Retreat Aid, Aerodacyl-Hitmonchan-Magmar, Raichu-Electabuzz Psychic

September 2024: VenuCenter Retreat Aid

• Points: 2x Venusaur (2 pts), 2x Dodrio (2 pts), 1x Computer Search (1 pts), 1x Gust of Wind (1 pts), 2x Pokemon Center (2 pts)
• Beating: Electabuzz Psychic, VenuCenter, VenuCenter Retreat Aid

September 2024 revision

• Point Changes! (7 voters, 4 to pass) 
• +1 Points: Pokemon Center (5 votes) 
• -1 Points: Alakazam (4 votes) Blastoise (4 votes) Chansey (5 votes) Ditto (5 votes) Dragonair (6 votes) Lickitung (5 votes) Wigglytuff (4 votes) 
• Did not pass: Aerodactyl (1 down) Arcanine (1 up) Dodrio (1 down) Item Finder (1 down) Lass (1 down) Mr Mime (1 up) Plus Power (1 down) Super Energy Removal (1 down) Slowbro (1 down) Tentacool (2 down) Venusaur (1 down) Magmar (1 up, write in) Charizard (1 up, write in)

October 2024: Fire Charizard-Electabuzz

• Points: 3 Gust of Wind (3 pts), 1 Computer Search (1 pt), 4 Double Colorless Energy (4 pts)
• Beat: Blastoise-Charizard, Electabuzz-Charizard-Wigglytuff and Seaking-Magmar Retreat Aid

November 2024: Rain Dance Charizard 

• Points: 2x Blastoise (4 pts), 2x Gust of Wind (2 pts), 1x Computer Search (1 pt), 1x Double Colorless Energy (1 pt)
• Beat: Charizard-Hitmonchan, Fire Charizard and Dragonair-Gengar Step In/Retreat Aid

December 2024 revision

(Just adding the points list for now!)

March 2025 revision

(Just adding the points list for now!) – note, this is missing Electabuzz at 1 point.

June 2025 revision

This season’s changes represent a change in direction, as almost all 70HP+ “Big Basics” are pointed and Computer Search, which had been 1 point since the almost the beginning of the format, decreased back to 0 points.

 

From the Beginning Until Now (Nov. 2024) – Outdated, Sorry!

From September 2023 until November 2024, the following cards on the points list changed:

• 8 cards increased (Arcanine and Slowbro were added at 1 pt)
  • Clefable went to 2 pts in December 2023 and then to 3 pts in March 2024
  • Energy Removal went to 2 pt in December 2023
  • Electrode went to 2 pts in March 2024
  • There have been talks of further increasing Arcanine, as well as adding other high-damage Pokemon (like Charizard) and efficient, ubiquitous Pokemon (like Electabuzz and Magmar)
• 13 cards decreased (and Gastly, Promo Mewtwo, Kangaskhan, Ditto and Pokemon Breeder going to 0 pts)
  • Computer Search and Gust of Wind went to 1 pt after first voting cycle
  • Dragonair was added in December 2023 but was removed in September 2024
  • There have been talks of reducing cards that have very high point costs (and removing/reducing additional cards that see no or little play)

The changes to the points list from September 2023 (without new cards added, though they are mentioned above): 

The Points of the Future 

So with all of that said, what’s next? Updating points!

When discussing how to update points, are there any other topics to discuss in earnest beyond the following? (Note: answers are most likely dependent on some spirit of the format consensus.)

• What should the total number of points be (and why and/or any concerns)? Currently, this is 8 (and could remain the same, but has also been discussed changing to 10, 12 or even 16).
• How to handle generically good (most efficient effects, like Dodrio, Double Color Energy (DCE), Gust of Wind, Electabuzz, Clefable) cards? I believe this is a diversity-related question, which is tied to the “Spirit of Format” discussion.
• Which cards lower the opponent’s agency (and to what degree)? I assume agency is tied into the spirit of format, as detailed above in “My Opinion…” subsection
• Which pointed cards must be considered in aggregate? Example: Alakazam+Mr. Mime+Tentacool
• How to handle DCE point cost? Currently, DCE is one point and some Pokemon that use it are also pointed. There has been some discussion that DCE could be zero points if many of the Pokemon that use it effectively had point costs.

Thank you for reading and contributing!