It depends on the format, if your playing modern, and you play a complete 75 card 100% copy, your retarded. Its such an open field right now you can play any good deck that you like and do ok. And the sideboard should be chosen the night before you play in a tourny, based on what you think will be out there, if you copy something down to the complete sideboard, something is wrong with you
One thing I absolutely love about these forums is that we tend to generally accept all people's perspectives and beliefs on the format of their choice. In the real world, however, I rarely encounter that.
I notice a lot of hate between netdecking and roguedecking. More specifically, I have encountered the following:
1. People who believe it is more fun to build a deck from scratch, but then complain when they lose to a deck that was taken from the internet.
2. People who not only complain about people who steal entire decks from the internet, but complain about people who dare use other decks for mere inspiration.
3. People who copy entire decks from the internet, then make fun of roguedeckers for having bad decks.
4. People who copy entire decks and then moan and groan when a roguedeck beats their netdeck.
and lastly, the one I find worst of all
5. People who dedicate their time to learning the ins and outs of all the cards, and believe that people who play using netdecks are scum to the community.
Is this an issue in my area specifically? You'd be surprised how often I come across it. I've personally seen someone who was poking major fun at someone because they decided they wanted to play a deck someone else made. I really don't understand where this hate comes from. If the fun of magic comes from making decks from boosters, do it. If the fun of magic comes from using other decks as inspiration, do it. If the fun of magic comes from understanding the ins and outs of legal cards, do it. If the fun of magic comes from just buying cool decks and playing against friends who do the same, do it. However, once you do that, you have no right to complain about the other people doing other things.
Feel free to share your two-cents, whether it's in agreeance or disagreeance.
For this topic, we'll need to take a step back here and look at what's happening from the outside in.
Constructed is a game of skill where people build a deck and proceed to engage other people in order to win by virtue of the deck they built. It's a two part equation, 1: Ability to recognize a good combination of cards, and 2: The ability to play the combination of cards effectively when faced with someone else's combination.
Netdecking inherently bypasses the first part of the exercise, and can (And often does) bypass the second part. Netdecking allows people who would otherwise lack the skill to compete and win. This doesn't apply to everyone who netdecks as some do have skill, but it does apply to a substantial portion of the people playing.
"Rogue decks" are people who have the skill to build a deck and the foresight to recognize that the bulk of the people at an event will have copied their decks from the internet. If I know that the majority of the people at an event will be playing a netdeck, and I can come up with some combination of cards that can beat the most common netdecks, then I can place easily by building said deck that takes advantage of that knowledge and playing the odds of only facing netdecks in my X games. Then I just have to bank on some/many/all of the other people who've placed being netdeckers who netdeck because they lack deckbuilding skill, and a T8 draft becomes easily to win.
So of course "Netdeckers" will hate "Rogue decks", Rogue players are taking advantage of their predictability in order to win the event and they're doing so in a way that eliminates all of the reasons why a person was netdecking in the first place. The "Netdecker"'s goal is to win, the method they employ is to use the deck of someone who will usually be more skilled than they are to do so, "Rogue decking" uses all of that against them.
In the end, it is a competition whether or not people like to admit it. Everyone will claim "Its about the fun", but if it really were just about the fun, then this discussion wouldn't exist because people wouldn't be netdecking to try and gain an advantage and there wouldn't be netdecks or roguedecks.
I don't play Constructed. Not in tourney scenes at any rate. Once in a while, I'll make a deck and play a few matches on MTGO or something, just for fun.
I think the hate stems from different viewpoints of the game.
Not the game of Magic, though that's a part of it, the metagame.
Sometimes it's a bit hard to process as such, because it's a whole other part of the base game of Magic, but the metagame is, in and of itself, a game. And those have their own psycho graphics.
Rouguedecker Timmy plays because they want the experience of it. The thrill of "I MADE THIS THING, AND I'M GONNA SMASH WITH IT!"
Roguedecker Jenny wants to prove that they can build decks with the best of them.
Roguedecker Spike wants to win. If they think it's by going off the rails, then by god, they will go off the rails.
Netdecker Tammy wants to play for the experience of feeling like a pro. "SOMEONE AWESOME MADE THIS, AND I'M GONNA SMASH WITH IT!"
Netdecker Johnny wants to play to show that they understand the combos and complexities that make a deck function.
Netdecker Spike wants to win. Someone "solved" the format, and there's no reason to play crap when you can play what wins.
And just like Magic Timmy&Tammy/Johnny&Jenny/Spike&Spike argue about what the best way to play the game is, so too will the metagamer versions.
It's about what they want out of the experience.
And, kind of in general, there's a toxicity in "Nerd" culture about the "right" way to do anything. It's just found a prominent niche in this form.
Just kinda my 2c on it. For what it's worth, my LGS has few toxic people. The few times I brought a standard deck in, nobody said anything rude, despite the fact that they were objectively garbage in the meta and in general.
I don't play Constructed. Not in tourney scenes at any rate. Once in a while, I'll make a deck and play a few matches on MTGO or something, just for fun.
I think the hate stems from different viewpoints of the game.
Not the game of Magic, though that's a part of it, the metagame.
Sometimes it's a bit hard to process as such, because it's a whole other part of the base game of Magic, but the metagame is, in and of itself, a game. And those have their own psycho graphics.
Rouguedecker Timmy plays because they want the experience of it. The thrill of "I MADE THIS THING, AND I'M GONNA SMASH WITH IT!"
Roguedecker Jenny wants to prove that they can build decks with the best of them.
Roguedecker Spike wants to win. If they think it's by going off the rails, then by god, they will go off the rails.
Netdecker Tammy wants to play for the experience of feeling like a pro. "SOMEONE AWESOME MADE THIS, AND I'M GONNA SMASH WITH IT!"
Netdecker Johnny wants to play to show that they understand the combos and complexities that make a deck function.
Netdecker Spike wants to win. Someone "solved" the format, and there's no reason to play crap when you can play what wins.
And just like Magic Timmy&Tammy/Johnny&Jenny/Spike&Spike argue about what the best way to play the game is, so too will the metagamer versions.
It's about what they want out of the experience.
And, kind of in general, there's a toxicity in "Nerd" culture about the "right" way to do anything. It's just found a prominent niche in this form.
Just kinda my 2c on it. For what it's worth, my LGS has few toxic people. The few times I brought a standard deck in, nobody said anything rude, despite the fact that they were objectively garbage in the meta and in general.
Nail.
On.
Head.
Roguedecking against your meta is the best FNM strat imho.
Pretend we live in a world where everyone has four copies of each card in Magic history. It's clear in that case that the netdecking vs homebrewing argument is pointless. Netdecking represents the collective wisdom of hundreds of hours of testing. The advantage you get from being finely tuned is balanced with the people playing against you knowing what they are up against. A homebrew may be unexpected or maybe it's tailored to take down a certain meta.
It's really financial/time reasons that drive this "debate". Some people can only afford say 60 cards, so they don't see the point in wasting money on something janky they theorycrafted. Some people have a collection that's missing cards, so they turn to homebrewing in order to make use of what they have. Or you have people with plenty of money, but very little time, so they try to make a metagame call on an established deck instead of spending time brewing.
I just know that there's no validity to thinking someone who takes down a GP or something isn't a good Magic player just because they didn't make their deck. That's just the mentality of people who want to give themselves more credit for not "giving in" to net decking. People also draw arbitrary lines as to what is netdecking. I've never looked at a Whip of Erebos list, but outside of maybe the land I could reproduce a list that was within a few cards of the actual list. Am I supposed to change cards just so that it's different than I remember? Am I supposed to just not make a Whip deck?
I like play against any sort of deck - homebrew or netdeck. It doesn't matter. When I first started to play MtG, which was three years ago, I homebrewed my own decks. I wasn't good at homebrewing but I did enjoy it nonetheless. I then started netdecking decks that I would like to play. One of my friends in my playgroup complained so much about me netdecking. I net decked a Mono U tron deck and he hated it so much hahahs Now I hve a UW Tron, which he hates even more. Thanks Iona! he was totally against netdecking until he was told that some of the best players in MtG mostly do it.
"Netdecking" and reactions to it is from what I've seen a purely Standard phenomenon. I've never seen Modern/Legacy players complain about it.
On the other hand, as someone who likes to play "rogue decks" in Modern, I do get some people who get slightly nettled about not being prepared to face non-status quo modern decks, which I find funny.
Netdecking is rediculous especially if you are playing randoms. The problem is there are too many people living in their mom's basements that can't convince their moms to build a deck for them so they have to resort to netdecking. Back in the day you couldn't even enter a tournament if you were using a published deck. The only real problems I have with them is I get bored with beating the same decks over and over again and deck building is an actual skill to have in this game. It sucks when you don't get the enjoyment of seeing other peoples creativity.
Public Mod Note
(motleyslayer):
warning issued for spam. also going to be locking this necro since only intent behind the comment in this thread was to troll
Netdecking is rediculous especially if you are playing randoms. The problem is there are too many people living in their mom's basements that can't convince their moms to build a deck for them so they have to resort to netdecking. Back in the day you couldn't even enter a tournament if you were using a published deck. The only real problems I have with them is I get bored with beating the same decks over and over again and deck building is an actual skill to have in this game. It sucks when you don't get the enjoyment of seeing other peoples creativity.
It's interesting that you used to live in a parallel universe where you couldn't register in a tournament with a published deck. Are people better at deck building over there or are they still as bad making tournaments rather ridiculous? Is global warming a problem there? Do you have flying cars? How did you transfer and could you go back?
Deck building is a skill. It is a difficult to refine skill that the vast majority of players don't have and if they did it would look the same as netdecking. I'm glad you get board beating weaker opponents rather than relishing your superiority but would you really be happier if those opponents not only couldn't play their decks but were playing absolute garbage? The first and most significant problem players have is getting to 60 cards followed by getting the number of lands right. Could you imagine a tournament where every match you are paired against a 100 card monstrosity that only has 30 lands is almost no 4-ofs? I've played such a tournament and it was awful. Netdecking isn't a problem and has never been a problem except for those who are actually unskilled and don't like to lose people who are marginally skilled and netdeck.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
For this topic, we'll need to take a step back here and look at what's happening from the outside in.
Constructed is a game of skill where people build a deck and proceed to engage other people in order to win by virtue of the deck they built. It's a two part equation, 1: Ability to recognize a good combination of cards, and 2: The ability to play the combination of cards effectively when faced with someone else's combination.
Netdecking inherently bypasses the first part of the exercise, and can (And often does) bypass the second part. Netdecking allows people who would otherwise lack the skill to compete and win. This doesn't apply to everyone who netdecks as some do have skill, but it does apply to a substantial portion of the people playing.
"Rogue decks" are people who have the skill to build a deck and the foresight to recognize that the bulk of the people at an event will have copied their decks from the internet. If I know that the majority of the people at an event will be playing a netdeck, and I can come up with some combination of cards that can beat the most common netdecks, then I can place easily by building said deck that takes advantage of that knowledge and playing the odds of only facing netdecks in my X games. Then I just have to bank on some/many/all of the other people who've placed being netdeckers who netdeck because they lack deckbuilding skill, and a T8 draft becomes easily to win.
So of course "Netdeckers" will hate "Rogue decks", Rogue players are taking advantage of their predictability in order to win the event and they're doing so in a way that eliminates all of the reasons why a person was netdecking in the first place. The "Netdecker"'s goal is to win, the method they employ is to use the deck of someone who will usually be more skilled than they are to do so, "Rogue decking" uses all of that against them.
In the end, it is a competition whether or not people like to admit it. Everyone will claim "Its about the fun", but if it really were just about the fun, then this discussion wouldn't exist because people wouldn't be netdecking to try and gain an advantage and there wouldn't be netdecks or roguedecks.
I think the hate stems from different viewpoints of the game.
Not the game of Magic, though that's a part of it, the metagame.
Sometimes it's a bit hard to process as such, because it's a whole other part of the base game of Magic, but the metagame is, in and of itself, a game. And those have their own psycho graphics.
Rouguedecker Timmy plays because they want the experience of it. The thrill of "I MADE THIS THING, AND I'M GONNA SMASH WITH IT!"
Roguedecker Jenny wants to prove that they can build decks with the best of them.
Roguedecker Spike wants to win. If they think it's by going off the rails, then by god, they will go off the rails.
Netdecker Tammy wants to play for the experience of feeling like a pro. "SOMEONE AWESOME MADE THIS, AND I'M GONNA SMASH WITH IT!"
Netdecker Johnny wants to play to show that they understand the combos and complexities that make a deck function.
Netdecker Spike wants to win. Someone "solved" the format, and there's no reason to play crap when you can play what wins.
And just like Magic Timmy&Tammy/Johnny&Jenny/Spike&Spike argue about what the best way to play the game is, so too will the metagamer versions.
It's about what they want out of the experience.
And, kind of in general, there's a toxicity in "Nerd" culture about the "right" way to do anything. It's just found a prominent niche in this form.
Just kinda my 2c on it. For what it's worth, my LGS has few toxic people. The few times I brought a standard deck in, nobody said anything rude, despite the fact that they were objectively garbage in the meta and in general.
Nail.
On.
Head.
Roguedecking against your meta is the best FNM strat imho.
RETIRED - GAME SUCKS
Modern:
UUUMerfolksUUU
RGoblinsR
Ad Nauseam
BR 8 Racks RB
WUB Mill BUW
Legacy:
XOps! All splels! X
What I think of MaRo
It's really financial/time reasons that drive this "debate". Some people can only afford say 60 cards, so they don't see the point in wasting money on something janky they theorycrafted. Some people have a collection that's missing cards, so they turn to homebrewing in order to make use of what they have. Or you have people with plenty of money, but very little time, so they try to make a metagame call on an established deck instead of spending time brewing.
I just know that there's no validity to thinking someone who takes down a GP or something isn't a good Magic player just because they didn't make their deck. That's just the mentality of people who want to give themselves more credit for not "giving in" to net decking. People also draw arbitrary lines as to what is netdecking. I've never looked at a Whip of Erebos list, but outside of maybe the land I could reproduce a list that was within a few cards of the actual list. Am I supposed to change cards just so that it's different than I remember? Am I supposed to just not make a Whip deck?
EDH
Roon of the Hidden Realms UGW
Modern
UW TronUW
Blocks Constructed
KamigawaU|Return to RavnicaUW|TherosUWG
On the other hand, as someone who likes to play "rogue decks" in Modern, I do get some people who get slightly nettled about not being prepared to face non-status quo modern decks, which I find funny.
Deck building is a skill. It is a difficult to refine skill that the vast majority of players don't have and if they did it would look the same as netdecking. I'm glad you get board beating weaker opponents rather than relishing your superiority but would you really be happier if those opponents not only couldn't play their decks but were playing absolute garbage? The first and most significant problem players have is getting to 60 cards followed by getting the number of lands right. Could you imagine a tournament where every match you are paired against a 100 card monstrosity that only has 30 lands is almost no 4-ofs? I've played such a tournament and it was awful. Netdecking isn't a problem and has never been a problem except for those who are actually unskilled and don't like to lose people who are marginally skilled and netdeck.