Well,
you have to admire Dragonfire's persistance...
Actually, DF is correct about one thing:
Scyther is overrated. I actually agree. Scyther is far too slow for my
standards. No sarcasm. He is no where near number one.
Now for the stuff I disagree with (in numerical
order for your convienience):
1) The entire "each energy is worth X
damage" thing is really not that important. Rattata can do 20 for 1
colorless energy. Wow, that card does more damage for each colorless energy
than Scyther can! So what? It's the end product that matters. The end damage
is what counts. (Plus, there's stats we have to contend with, but let's skip
that)
2) Kangaskan may be able to do more damage, but for 4 energy. Plus there's a
risk factor of coin flipping. I hate that.
3) Within four turns, Kangaskan can do approximately 65 damage. Scyther, on
the other hand, can do about 75 in the same 4 turn slot (without the aid of
grass). So Scyther can do more damage.
4) Since when is fighting a dead
type? So a weakness to Hitmonchan is good, but a weakness to Magmar is bad?
5) Determining if psychic resistance is
better than fighting resistance is based purely on the metagame of your area.
6) You have to acknowledge retreat cost. Kangaskan's is 3. Scyther has none.
No retreat cost is so good I can't even begin.
7) Scyther helps more than Grass decks. He can help any deck based on damage.
Dragonfire,
have you ever played the game in a real match? On paper, everything you've
said is true. But once you actually play a game, you get to understand the
difference between Kangaskan and Scyther in both power and versitility. I know
you hate Scyther, but at least acknowledge his power.
-The Whether Man