Maybe i'm just old school.

[hammerinn]

I don't understand how in ranked almost everyone plays the same 10 decks. Has winning in a game with only cards as a reward THAT important? It used to be the fun was creating a deck, not copying one.

[Berserkr]

Welcome to todays gaming, mmo raid builds all the same builds, ccgs all the same decks

[Kurt Angle's Neck]

The objective of any game is to win. Using a top meta deck will net the highest chance of achieving that goal. If you want to play the game sub-optimally because you find it more fun, then have at it, but I don't understand trying to fault others for using the best available strats to achieve the goal of winning games.

[hammerinn]

Originally posted by Kurt Angle's Neck:

The objective of any game is to win. Using a top meta deck will net the highest chance of achieving that goal. If you want to play the game sub-optimally because you find it more fun, then have at it, but I don't understand trying to fault others for using the best available strats to achieve the goal of winning games.

Sure, but you just get cards...cards you won't use because you only meta.

[mwesthoff]

Maybe they will open a new queue for losers? Until then, I will stick to my modified versions of net decks that stomp other net decks.

[ʍolɟ ǝɥʇ ǝsɹǝʌǝɹ]

Its about consistency and efficiency. The 2 metrics of netdecks are winrate and average match length.

[Winter Wolf]

I mean I build new decks all the time. MOST decks I build don't see ranked play because they are not for facing the "meta" even though PLAY queue is usually about the same level of meta decks/nonmeta mix.

But when I am playing to rank up (rarely of late) I use either a more tried and true deck or something I've tweaked to fight the current bunch of top tier decks. Either way if my idea is any good it becomes the meta and then the cycle starts over again because as someone else pointed out, in ranked the goal is to win. (And at the very top levels to earn money $$ which is always a cutthroat business.)

Maybe what we need is a stickied thread with all of our latest inspirations to give our fellow players (and competitors) new ideas to play with instead of complaining how thoroughly messed up the meta is.

[Mirror]

i am old school and I despise meta constructed decks. Everyone has the same deck and every game is the same. Nothing unique or interesting ever happens. Just aggro or control. Color doesnt matter. I make my own decks and never bother looking at guides or deck lists because I dont want to play the same thing every damn game. The Magic of today is disgusting compared to what I used to see in the 90s-00s. People knew how to be creative. Now everyone is an npc.

[DontMisunderstand]

It's real easy to build a deck that performs to the mathematical limit of the card game. I guess most people don't understand the game or the math behind it well enough to do that? And/or don't want to put in effort to participate in the hobby.

[Nubbles]

Brawl can scratch that itch. Limited can too. Brawl is a format that still hasn't been "solved" and people bring whatever they like anyway. Those who don't want to think about their decks are less likely to play brawl or limited.

[Doctor Zalgo]

Originally posted by ʍolɟ ǝɥʇ ǝsɹǝʌǝɹ:

Its about consistency and efficiency. The 2 metrics of netdecks are winrate and average match length.

Yeah, but there's no leaderboard so I can just pretend I've got the top winrate with my janky BGR token shredding deck.

[Ravenns24]

Yeah, it's sometimes very tedious when you play multiple games one after another and it's just dorks running 40 removals and board wipes, and alternative if you get lucky is mono red.

I get nothing but heavy removal\board wipes or counterspell decks all the time, it makes it so tedious to play sometimes.

[Snoot Boops]

Originally posted by hammerinn:

I don't understand how in ranked almost everyone plays the same 10 decks. Has winning in a game with only cards as a reward THAT important? It used to be the fun was creating a deck, not copying one.

i said the same thing a while back ago and got some pretty heavy backlash for it. i dont play ranked anymore so it doesn't really matter but you still see the copy/paste decks in unranked matches. its pretty boring. i actually get pretty excited to see a sliver deck. not a copy/paste one. like a real one. lets me know 1 of 2 things. either they're old school or they're just some copy paste punk. it really obvious when it's copy/paste because they don't know how to run slivers. the ones that do know how, man.... brutal matches.

[Soji]

Yes, the point of ranked is to win. That isn't an old school/new school thing.

[DontMisunderstand]

Originally posted by Soji:

Yes, the point of ranked is to win. That isn't an old school/new school thing.

Winning has nothing to do with this topic at all.

[Soji]

Originally posted by DontMisunderstand:

Originally posted by Soji:

Yes, the point of ranked is to win. That isn't an old school/new school thing.

Winning has nothing to do with this topic at all.

Please read the OP again, slowly. Twice if you need to.