Way too many aggro decks

[DontMisunderstand]

37 consecutive matches against aggro in a row, and counting. I'm not saying the matchmaking is broken, but I am saying that if it's not then there need to be literally hundreds of bans to heavily discourage playing aggro.

[The_Dybbuk_King]

Or you could play a deck that beats aggro rather than complaining about it.

[DontMisunderstand]

Originally posted by The_Dybbuk_King:

Or you could play a deck that beats aggro rather than complaining about it.

Notice how I didn't mention losing at all in my post? It's because I'm not. It's just not fun playing non-games simply because the opponent doesn't want a game to be played.

[The_Dybbuk_King]

Originally posted by DontMisunderstand:

Originally posted by The_Dybbuk_King:

Or you could play a deck that beats aggro rather than complaining about it.

Notice how I didn't mention losing at all in my post? It's because I'm not. It's just not fun playing non-games simply because the opponent doesn't want a game to be played.

Yeah, because randomly calling for bans for no reason is the logical go-to. Lol steam forums are hilarious.

[DontMisunderstand]

Originally posted by The_Dybbuk_King:

Originally posted by DontMisunderstand:

Notice how I didn't mention losing at all in my post? It's because I'm not. It's just not fun playing non-games simply because the opponent doesn't want a game to be played.

Yeah, because randomly calling for bans for no reason is the logical go-to. Lol steam forums are hilarious.

I literally did give a reason... the oversaturation of aggro decks. You know, the actual best empirical evidence for the necessity of bans. Also notice, I pointed out alternative potential explanations.

[Kurt Angle's Neck]

Come on, man... you want to ban anyone who uses 1 of the 3 main archetypes that exist in the game? If we're gonna do that, I'd much rather get rid of control than aggro...

[The_Dybbuk_King]

Originally posted by DontMisunderstand:

Originally posted by The_Dybbuk_King:

Yeah, because randomly calling for bans for no reason is the logical go-to. Lol steam forums are hilarious.

I literally did give a reason... the oversaturation of aggro decks. You know, the actual best empirical evidence for the necessity of bans. Also notice, I pointed out alternative potential explanations.

"Oversaturation"

Except Azorious control (@~12% of the meta), temur Land combo (~10% of the meta), and Esper midrange (~10%) all exist. But yeah, let's ban cards for no reason. Lol

[DontMisunderstand]

Originally posted by Kurt Angle's Neck:

Come on, man... you want to ban anyone who uses 1 of the 3 main archetypes that exist in the game? If we're gonna do that, I'd much rather get rid of control than aggro...

Literally not what was said. Read more carefully.

[Kurt Angle's Neck]

Originally posted by DontMisunderstand:

Originally posted by Kurt Angle's Neck:

Come on, man... you want to ban anyone who uses 1 of the 3 main archetypes that exist in the game? If we're gonna do that, I'd much rather get rid of control than aggro...

Literally not what was said. Read more carefully.

Just re-read it, still not getting anything different out of what you said. You're advocating for banning players that play aggro decks. That's insane.

[DontMisunderstand]

Originally posted by Kurt Angle's Neck:

Originally posted by DontMisunderstand:

Literally not what was said. Read more carefully.

Just re-read it, still not getting anything different out of what you said. You're advocating for banning players that play aggro decks. That's insane.

Not what I said at all. I said, either the matchmaking is broken, or the natural state of the game leans so heavily in favor of aggro decks to require that level of intervention to make it EQUALLY prevalent to non-aggro decks. Like... just the math here. If all the archetypes were equally prevalent, this one experience would be a five in a quintillion chance of occurring. Which is five times LESS likely than playing the mega-millions lottery twice in your life and winning the jackpot both times. Just to explain how astronomically improbable this occurrence should be... if every human being on the planet played 100 games per day, every day, for 274 years, there'd STILL be less than a 17% chance for any of them at any point to have experienced a string like this. Therefore, it should be uncontroversial to say that either the matchmaking is in fact broken or that there is a very heavy pro-aggro lean to the game that should be addressed.

If you believe that it's best for all 3 major archetypes to be a major part of the game, then the very silly and non-serious suggestion I made is extremely reasonable, based on the very silly anecdotal evidence presented.

Look, I didn't think I had to say this, but very obviously the actual solution is somewhere between all of these extremes. Very obviously, the only guarantees in statistics are 0% and 100%. It should also be apparent that the game does favor aggro simply by having x number of wins per day be rewarded. And by the very nature of how time and space work, there are going to be abnormalities in any matchmaking system that puts two human beings together. All of these things are relevant to this exact discussion.

[Kskaudonsu]

Every time I'm getting flooded with aggro, I go slap a stupid looking person IRL. If we all take that sentiment to its next logical level and do it together, this problem will take care of itself.

[Briscoletta]

Originally posted by Kurt Angle's Neck:

Originally posted by DontMisunderstand:

Literally not what was said. Read more carefully.

Just re-read it, still not getting anything different out of what you said. You're advocating for banning players that play aggro decks. That's insane.

omfg he is talking about hitting cards, not people. are you braindead or what??

[Merry Christmas X-Box Its Usher]

if you are playing best of one stop playing best of one it. if you aren't you are just lying.

[Kurt Angle's Neck]

Originally posted by DontMisunderstand:

Not what I said at all. I said, either the matchmaking is broken, or the natural state of the game leans so heavily in favor of aggro decks to require that level of intervention to make it EQUALLY prevalent to non-aggro decks. Like... just the math here. If all the archetypes were equally prevalent, this one experience would be a five in a quintillion chance of occurring. Which is five times LESS likely than playing the mega-millions lottery twice in your life and winning the jackpot both times. Just to explain how astronomically improbable this occurrence should be... if every human being on the planet played 100 games per day, every day, for 274 years, there'd STILL be less than a 17% chance for any of them at any point to have experienced a string like this. Therefore, it should be uncontroversial to say that either the matchmaking is in fact broken or that there is a very heavy pro-aggro lean to the game that should be addressed.

If you believe that it's best for all 3 major archetypes to be a major part of the game, then the very silly and non-serious suggestion I made is extremely reasonable, based on the very silly anecdotal evidence presented.

Look, I didn't think I had to say this, but very obviously the actual solution is somewhere between all of these extremes. Very obviously, the only guarantees in statistics are 0% and 100%. It should also be apparent that the game does favor aggro simply by having x number of wins per day be rewarded. And by the very nature of how time and space work, there are going to be abnormalities in any matchmaking system that puts two human beings together. All of these things are relevant to this exact discussion.

Why even bother doing calculations on a hypothetical that you know isn't occurring? Of course the 3 archetypes aren't going to be equally prevalent, aggro will get you your rewards faster, most players are just looking to get their dailies done. They could eliminate the daily wins and add more daily quests that aren't win related, and that would probably solve a lot of it, but there's no reason to start banning players/cards. You don't see the same amount of aggro use in paper magic because it's not an issue with the cards, it's an issue with the playerbase and reward incentives.

[Kurt Angle's Neck]

Originally posted by Briscoletta:

Originally posted by Kurt Angle's Neck:

Just re-read it, still not getting anything different out of what you said. You're advocating for banning players that play aggro decks. That's insane.

omfg he is talking about hitting cards, not people. are you braindead or what??

Even if that's true it's still just as terrible of a suggestion as banning players. The problem is with the reward system, not with aggro needing nerfed.

[DontMisunderstand]

Originally posted by Kurt Angle's Neck:

Why even bother doing calculations on a hypothetical that you know isn't occurring? Of course the 3 archetypes aren't going to be equally prevalent, aggro will get you your rewards faster, most players are just looking to get their dailies done. They could eliminate the daily wins and add more daily quests that aren't win related, and that would probably solve a lot of it, but there's no reason to start banning players/cards. You don't see the same amount of aggro use in paper magic because it's not an issue with the cards, it's an issue with the playerbase and reward incentives.

Reason 1: because I like doing calculations.
Reason 2: because it serves a rhetorical purpose.
Reason 3: evidence is cool and fun.

Yeah, you're right. Re-working the reward structure would be a better solution, but it'd also be a lot more work. Repetitions would need not to be a more advantageous strategy to achieve rewards, for total rank, daily challenges, and daily wins. Banning individual cards would absolutely have an impact, but it would be at best a temporary stemming of the tide rather than a real solution.