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.

[ChaffyExpert]

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.

It's not playing "sub optimally" just because they aren't braindead enough they need the internet to make a deck it just means they suck at the game, compared to people that build their own decks and actually are good at the game and the deckbuilding phase that they can win without needing to copy some deck online.

[ChaffyExpert]

Originally posted by Soji:

Originally posted by Nec:

This 1000 times, I've only been participating in the steam forums for little over a month now and 80% of the regulars have horrible main character syndrome.

card games just seem to attract crybaby, control freaks. They can't actually take agency away from other players so they try to belittle everyone calling them metasheep or tryhards. i usually try to ignore them these, but this guy literally revived a dead thread from months ago just to complain to me. It's best to try and ignore them because its exactly as you say, all main character syndrome, all sore losers, all constantly complaining people dare play the game in a way they don't think they should.

Why are you so angry and hostile about people not wanting to play the same 5 decks that require no thinking it's just "read internet, click click click win" There is no strategy. You are acting like it's a legitimate form of playing that others are complaining about, and not something RUINING the game and making it UNFUN while at the same time requireing NO THINKING whatseover.

People that play meta aren't playing the game at all, they are just clicking mindlessly.

I don't see how it's "main character syndrome" to actually want a game to be fun.

Not to mention, you are doing everything you are accusing everyone else of doing here, like the irony in this post is unbelievable.

[Kurt Angle's Neck]

Originally posted by ChaffyExpert:

It's not playing "sub optimally" just because they aren't braindead enough they need the internet to make a deck it just means they suck at the game, compared to people that build their own decks and actually are good at the game and the deckbuilding phase that they can win without needing to copy some deck online.

Your assumption that people only use meta decks if they're incapable of building their own unique deck is unfounded and untrue. Go to any tournament and let me know how many decks you see that aren't some meta variation. The meta is formed by people searching for the most optimal builds possible in any given format. If you can present a solution that is better than the current meta, people will catch on quickly and start playing your build, making it the new meta.

If you think all of the top tournament players are braindead morons who are just copying decks, why not enter some tourneys and show the world how great you are? There's pretty decent sums of cash to be won, and it should be super easy since you already know what everyone else is going to be playing.

[Soji]

Originally posted by ChaffyExpert:

the irony in this post is unbelievable.

my thoughts exactly lmao

[The_Dybbuk_King]

Originally posted by Kurt Angle's Neck:

Originally posted by ChaffyExpert:

It's not playing "sub optimally" just because they aren't braindead enough they need the internet to make a deck it just means they suck at the game, compared to people that build their own decks and actually are good at the game and the deckbuilding phase that they can win without needing to copy some deck online.

Your assumption that people only use meta decks if they're incapable of building their own unique deck is unfounded and untrue. Go to any tournament and let me know how many decks you see that aren't some meta variation. The meta is formed by people searching for the most optimal builds possible in any given format. If you can present a solution that is better than the current meta, people will catch on quickly and start playing your build, making it the new meta.

If you think all of the top tournament players are braindead morons who are just copying decks, why not enter some tourneys and show the world how great you are? There's pretty decent sums of cash to be won, and it should be super easy since you already know what everyone else is going to be playing.

My man spittin.

Originally posted by ChaffyExpert:

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.

It's not playing "sub optimally" just because they aren't braindead enough they need the internet to make a deck it just means they suck at the game, compared to people that build their own decks and actually are good at the game and the deckbuilding phase that they can win without needing to copy some deck online.

If you think you are ACTUALLY good at deckbuilding, play draft/sealed. But chances are, you aren't good at that either.

[Kskaudonsu]

Originally posted by Kurt Angle's Neck:

The objective of any game is to Have fun .

FTFY my joyless brother.

A winner being declared is more or less supposed to be icing on the cake. This applies to all games. The object of the super bowl is not to win. It's to win an amazingly well-played game by both sides with plenty of exciting plays that showcase the talent on the field at their full potential. Don't believe me? Would you rather win a Super Bowl 24-0 in an ugly, sloppy game that no one will talk about in the future, or win a Super Bowl 30-27 and have people singing its praises for a century? If you think about it this way, I think you'd agree there's more than winning on the table. Yet, we act in our games like we're okay doing the former at all costs.

[The_Dybbuk_King]

Originally posted by Kskaudonsu:

Originally posted by Kurt Angle's Neck:

The objective of any game is to Have fun .

FTFY my joyless brother.

A winner being declared is more or less supposed to be icing on the cake. This applies to all games. The object of the super bowl is not to win. It's to win an amazingly well-played game by both sides with plenty of exciting plays that showcase the talent on the field at their full potential. Don't believe me? Would you rather win a Super Bowl 24-0 in an ugly, sloppy game that no one will talk about in the future, or win a Super Bowl 30-27 and have people singing its praises for a century? If you think about it this way, I think you'd agree there's more than winning on the table. Yet, we act in our games like we're okay doing the former at all costs.

Lmfao

[Kurt Angle's Neck]

Originally posted by Kskaudonsu:

Originally posted by Kurt Angle's Neck:

The objective of any game is to Have fun .

FTFY my joyless brother.

A winner being declared is more or less supposed to be icing on the cake. This applies to all games. The object of the super bowl is not to win. It's to win an amazingly well-played game by both sides with plenty of exciting plays that showcase the talent on the field at their full potential. Don't believe me? Would you rather win a Super Bowl 24-0 in an ugly, sloppy game that no one will talk about in the future, or win a Super Bowl 30-27 and have people singing its praises for a century? If you think about it this way, I think you'd agree there's more than winning on the table. Yet, we act in our games like we're okay doing the former at all costs.

Yes, you're right... NFL players spend countless hours putting themselves through intense physical training, adhere to strict diets, and spend millions of dollars... to maximize the amount of fun that everyone can have in the Super Bowl. No idea why I ever assumed they were doing all that to increase their chances at winning, that was crazy of me. Thanks for setting me straight, brother.

[Briscoletta]

basically every site that suggests meta picks, with lists etc. is lowering the skill requirement of the game. Such games are full of noobs that without playing top tier meta picks lose badly, then the ranking system is pointless. It is not about the most skilled players, but the players that copy the most brainless deck possible. This thing ruins the game, because only top meta brainless decks are around, creativity get deleted out of the equation, you need to be one of them to play the game on equal terms. In the end the game is dead. Thanks to modern technologies and lazy people that want to win effortless, every thing that involves a competition, from markets, sports, games etc. ends up dead. The quality is lowered so much that people who really enjoyed that thing leave because it is boring.

[Namdoolb]

Originally posted by Briscoletta:

basically every site that suggests meta picks, with lists etc. is lowering the skill requirement of the game. Such games are full of noobs that without playing top tier meta picks lose badly, then the ranking system is pointless. It is not about the most skilled players, but the players that copy the most brainless deck possible. This thing ruins the game, because only top meta brainless decks are around, creativity get deleted out of the equation, you need to be one of them to play the game on equal terms. In the end the game is dead. Thanks to modern technologies and lazy people that want to win effortless, every thing that involves a competition, from markets, sports, games etc. ends up dead. The quality is lowered so much that people who really enjoyed that thing leave because it is boring.

First things..... MTG has had netdecks since before I started playing properly (~15 years ago, but who's counting?) Game's still fairly alive.
Sure, netdecks are more easily accessible now. But you could still find them back in the day if you had a mind to look for them.

Bo1 Arena very much rewards players for aggregate number of matches played. As long as the deck has a decent win rate, a fast game time resulting in a large number of matches played is preferable to a slightly higher win rate with a longer match time. This skews the landscape of Bo1, & is where all the fast aggro decks come from (& why RDW is usually top of the Bo1 tier list). (The hand smoother also doesn't help - rewarding players for playing fast decks with low land counts that wouldn't work reliably irl.)

Funnily enough, you can beat fast aggro (and RDW in particular) quite easily. You'll just end up compromising your matchup against the rest of the field if you go hard against those decks.

Move into Bo3, and the fast aggro decks are less popular. Move into Pen & paper MTG, & they are less popular still.
Don't get me wrong, both of those formats still have their popular decks. People still netdeck for those formats. But when the emphasis goes from quantity of games to quality of games, people start opting for more resilient decks that can leverage player skill more effectively.

The TLDR (if there is one) is that Bo1 is a skewed representation of MTG which actively rewards players for playing fast, aggressive, simplistic decks in a way that the game itself does not.

[The_Dybbuk_King]

Originally posted by Briscoletta:

basically every site that suggests meta picks, with lists etc. is lowering the skill requirement of the game. Such games are full of noobs that without playing top tier meta picks lose badly, then the ranking system is pointless. It is not about the most skilled players, but the players that copy the most brainless deck possible. This thing ruins the game, because only top meta brainless decks are around, creativity get deleted out of the equation, you need to be one of them to play the game on equal terms. In the end the game is dead. Thanks to modern technologies and lazy people that want to win effortless, every thing that involves a competition, from markets, sports, games etc. ends up dead. The quality is lowered so much that people who really enjoyed that thing leave because it is boring.

Lmfao these guys just do not get it. If you were better than the "brainless noobs," you would have no problem constructing a deck to beat them or outplay them. 100% skill issue.


This thread brought to you in part by:

Originally posted by Briscoletta:

lazy people that want to win effortless,

[tovie]

Originally posted by Berserkr:

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

back in the days of guildwars 1 i loved beating up idiots with their builds copied straight from the wiki. that mmo was so good

[TheWashableBomb]

ITT: "I willingly choose weak tools to go against someone with strong tools and I'm very upset that I lost. I should win if I use weak tools, and I'm smarter for using weak tools. My weak deck is smart and cool and "in the spirit of the game" and his deck is stupid and lame and was copied off the internet (even though I have no evidence of this)."


All of my lmao

[Briscoletta]

Originally posted by The_Dybbuk_King:

Originally posted by Briscoletta:

basically every site that suggests meta picks, with lists etc. is lowering the skill requirement of the game. Such games are full of noobs that without playing top tier meta picks lose badly, then the ranking system is pointless. It is not about the most skilled players, but the players that copy the most brainless deck possible. This thing ruins the game, because only top meta brainless decks are around, creativity get deleted out of the equation, you need to be one of them to play the game on equal terms. In the end the game is dead. Thanks to modern technologies and lazy people that want to win effortless, every thing that involves a competition, from markets, sports, games etc. ends up dead. The quality is lowered so much that people who really enjoyed that thing leave because it is boring.

Lmfao these guys just do not get it. If you were better than the "brainless noobs," you would have no problem constructing a deck to beat them or outplay them. 100% skill issue.

Originally posted by TheWashableBomb:

ITT: "I willingly choose weak tools to go against someone with strong tools and I'm very upset that I lost. I should win if I use weak tools, and I'm smarter for using weak tools. My weak deck is smart and cool and "in the spirit of the game" and his deck is stupid and lame and was copied off the internet (even though I have no evidence of this)."


All of my lmao

"no evidence" ofc it is pure coincidence that people use the same deck with the same cards with the exact same cardlist over and over. Thank you for confirming that your opinion is invalid because you are another meta abuser.

[Kurt Angle's Neck]

Originally posted by Briscoletta:

"no evidence" ofc it is pure coincidence that people use the same deck with the same cards with the exact same cardlist over and over. Thank you for confirming that your opinion is invalid because you are another meta abuser.

Nobody is claiming that's a coincidence. It's called a meta. It exists in every strategy game.