Now before You start with how wrong i am, i would like to make my argument and explain to you what netdecking in Cards like hearthstone and other Cards do to either player bases or the meta itself and how it makes Points of view very bias
Let me define what netdecking is before we start. Netdecking is the act of if someone sees a deck on reddit or a deck they see that wins a tournament will copy and paste it card for card based off of what they saw. Now the main motives of doing this is sometimes humans see something that gets good results for someone and they feel like they would want to have that same success, other wise known as "the bandwagon effect". The other motive is probably the fact that some people will admit they dont have the brains to make their own deck ideas and they just feel like they want to make something that will give them a good experience, kinda like the first point i made.
Now, why is netdecking a problem? The problem i see with netdecking nowadays is that players who play what is viewed as "the best deck" often have their points of views in a way where its bias towards the current tier 1 or 2 decks. This brings me to the point of where people tend to have a more jaded point of view when it comes to seeing new ideas or ways to play differently on other decks.
The other thing that gets effected by netdecking is card reviews. right now we are in a time where we will be getting over 100 cards in the meta starting in a few weeks, granted not all the cards will be good enough to be good and thats to be expected. however the problem is the players who play nothing but netdecks or meta decks have their points of view skewed in one direction of if it doesnt counter deck XYZ or build upon Deck XYZ, then its not worth trying. There has been so many sets where ive see this happen its to the point where you can tell where the lack of creative thought is happening because changes are that player only plays decks that they think is an established point of view.
I know this will not be a popular point of View to have considering im sure most of you will say there is nothing wrong with what i mentioned, and to that i would argue that you are either part of the base i was mentioning or you just dont know it. Is there something wrong with trying something based off how cool it looks to play? No, in fact i think it helps to learn what works and what doesnt. there have been a few decklists ive seen that i tried and found were interesting. The point i am making is there is a form of Tribalism in gaming where its weird to try things out for the fact of having fun.
maybe im wrong? maybe its just something to accept and its just the fact i need to "jump on the bandwagon" let me know your thoughts. one last thing, if youre gonna Comment with " people tend to netdeck cause they want to play whats good" 1, thats subjective, 2. you just proved my point.
There is nothing wrong with netdecking. What most of these complainers don't realise, is that there are a lot of f2p players who don't get the entire expansion every time on release day. Why wouldn't they try to build what the community considers the most efficient deck? They don't have the dust to craft whatever they want if they want to do well.
Besides, if a new player literally netdecks someone else without understanding the card choices, they will most likely be pretty bad with the deck anyway. I honestly don't get why people get so mad about it.
To your point about card reviewers, most of them are pro players who play the best decks often to practice for tournaments/achieve high legend. For that reason, they see cards within the context of the decks that are good in the meta. Of course, there are often times new decks that come from expansions, but it takes a lot to change the top dogs. For you and me, however, it is totally fine to try and think more creatively about the cards. I think most of the community placates to the streamers point of view, when for us the point of the game should be fun so non top-tier cards are reviewed too harshly.
Now before You start with how wrong i am, i would like to make my argument and explain to you what netdecking in Cards like hearthstone and other Cards do to either player bases or the meta itself and how it makes Points of view very bias
Let me define what netdecking is before we start. Netdecking is the act of if someone sees a deck on reddit or a deck they see that wins a tournament will copy and paste it card for card based off of what they saw. Now the main motives of doing this is sometimes humans see something that gets good results for someone and they feel like they would want to have that same success, other wise known as "the bandwagon effect". The other motive is probably the fact that some people will admit they dont have the brains to make their own deck ideas and they just feel like they want to make something that will give them a good experience, kinda like the first point i made.
Now, why is netdecking a problem? The problem i see with netdecking nowadays is that players who play what is viewed as "the best deck" often have their points of views in a way where its bias towards the current tier 1 or 2 decks. This brings me to the point of where people tend to have a more jaded point of view when it comes to seeing new ideas or ways to play differently on other decks.
The other thing that gets effected by netdecking is card reviews. right now we are in a time where we will be getting over 100 cards in the meta starting in a few weeks, granted not all the cards will be good enough to be good and thats to be expected. however the problem is the players who play nothing but netdecks or meta decks have their points of view skewed in one direction of if it doesnt counter deck XYZ or build upon Deck XYZ, then its not worth trying. There has been so many sets where ive see this happen its to the point where you can tell where the lack of creative thought is happening because changes are that player only plays decks that they think is an established point of view.
I know this will not be a popular point of View to have considering im sure most of you will say there is nothing wrong with what i mentioned, and to that i would argue that you are either part of the base i was mentioning or you just dont know it. Is there something wrong with trying something based off how cool it looks to play? No, in fact i think it helps to learn what works and what doesnt. there have been a few decklists ive seen that i tried and found were interesting. The point i am making is there is a form of Tribalism in gaming where its weird to try things out for the fact of having fun.
maybe im wrong? maybe its just something to accept and its just the fact i need to "jump on the bandwagon" let me know your thoughts
Depends on the person s play style. Rather competitively or for fun. Yet I think it does. The fun element is really decreasing that way.
There is nothing wrong with netdecking. What most of these complainers don't realise, is that there are a lot of f2p players who don't get the entire expansion every time on release day. Why wouldn't they try to build what the community considers the most efficient deck? They don't have the dust to craft whatever they want if they want to do well.
Besides, if a new player literally netdecks someone else without understanding the card choices, they will most likely be pretty bad with the deck anyway. I honestly don't get why people get so mad about it.
I guess you didnt read what i wrote whatsoever. I explained why its a bad thing >.> This is exactly what i expected as a response
It doesn't matter what game it is, people get sick of seeing the same crap over and over and being beaten by the same dumb mechanics. In PvE games like WoW raiding, or Diablo rifts, everyone copies the best builds and tries to get strategies down. Nobody complains about that and its expected that you follow what the pros are doing. However, playing Starcraft, I've bitched about 6-poolers and in COD:MW2 "noob-tubers" were a total pain in the ass. Taking a popular, yet effective approach to the game is always going to frustrate people. People became super excited when Finja was first used in water rogue, when Mysterious Challenger was figured out and when Grim Patron's interaction was discovered in warrior. But then they became overplayed and became frustrating. So people love the thrill of a new effective discovery, they just don't want to do the discovering themselves.
There is nothing wrong with netdecking. What most of these complainers don't realise, is that there are a lot of f2p players who don't get the entire expansion every time on release day. Why wouldn't they try to build what the community considers the most efficient deck? They don't have the dust to craft whatever they want if they want to do well.
Besides, if a new player literally netdecks someone else without understanding the card choices, they will most likely be pretty bad with the deck anyway. I honestly don't get why people get so mad about it.
I think the f2p mentality is heavily ruined by netdecking TBH. Whenever I see someone complaining that Jade Druid, for example has too many legendaries it makes me fairly sad. People don't realize you can win without every single legendary or epic in the netdeck. To use my example, there are f2p Jade Druids who have had success without Aya, Malfurion, Kun, Ultimate Infestation, etc. It takes experimentation and actual thinking, however.
People are going to use what works. If you suck at creating decks (like I do) netdecking is the only way to assure you'll get a good rank.
Essentially this!
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Experienced Deckbuilder, Legend Player, Wild Expert, TCG Veteran and Contributing Author toWildHS & Vicious Syndicate. Any and all support is greatly appreciated as it helps me make further quality content. 🐺 ➣Twitter ➣Decks ➣Patreon
Personally, I would define netdecking in Hearthstone as the act of copying a popular deck in the meta while only changing a small set of the cards to fit it to your collection or adapt it just a bit more to your playstyle.
This paragraph might seem random, but it leads into a point. Personally, I love to create my own decks. I've built a Wild Reno MalyMage, WOMP Shaman (Freeze Shaman), Wild Dead Man's Juggernaut Warrior, and a Wild Handbuff Paladin without Prince Keleseth. Now, I don't actually have all of the cards to any of these decks, but I still build decks because I'm not that bad at deckbuilding, and it's fun seeing my decks get used by some of the people I talk to on a regular basis. Are all of the decks I mentioned supposed to be good? No, in fact, only 2 of them are built to be competitive, but all 4 of them are ridiculously fun to play, from what I have seen. As a budget player, I practice deckbuilding because I genuinely enjoy it, and I want to improve. But, as a budget player, I don't have the collection to build a Tier 1 deck. So, when K&C releases, and the meta settles, I am going to want to build a deck that I will be able to climb the Wild ladder with. I've managed to save around 9.5k dust thanks to being able to buy around 100-140 Classic packs recently, and with that dust, I am most likely going to be forced to build a meta deck, simply because the amount of time it would take me to build another Wild deck and get it tested by my friends would be a bit long. As much as I hate to say it, I will netdeck, because I am a competitive person, and want to achieve high ranks. I will do my best to find a Tier 1/Tier S deck that suits my playstyle, and adjust it to a bit more to my preferred playstyle, but I will be netdecking once the meta settles and the meta decks reveal themselves.
I do not like netdecking, but not having a complete collection, I feel forced into doing it. If I had a full collection, you could bet money I'd build my own decks to climb with, and I personally believe people with full collections should build their own decks to climb with after achieving Rank 10/5 each season, but I think that people without the collection to do it feel forced, like I do.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If you need a Wild deck that is fun, competitive, high skill, and low RNG, check out my Highlander Malygos Deck!
You know what's worse than netdecking? These threads. We literally have another thread just like this, several pages long, on this page. Your opinion on netdecking is not so original that we need yet another topic on it.
People want to play the best decks, that's all there is to it, if you don't like netdecking play a non-competitive game.
These posts are always too general. It depends on the situation, of course the widespread net decking of certain top tier decks is degenerative but that doesn't mean everyone should be condemned for copying some lists and cards to stay competitive.
As a collector, my opinion is that netdecking is shooting yourself in the foot. You get stuck with the deck you built, and repurposing it is expensive. True, it gives you a leg up on reaching high rank, where you unlock sweet reward every month, but is the grind really worth it?
I build an awesome deck that wins a lot, but after a week I'm ready for the next thing. I have 9 viable classes with dozens of viable archetypes, even moreso in wild. It took me a solid year to learn how to craft decks, but now that I can do it well enough, I have limitless fun at my disposal.
FYI, the only cards I've crafted outside the classic set since my start during TGT are Dr boom, nzoth, and keleseth. My tempo decks do just fine without patches.
I've never really had an issue with netdecking but I usually try to make a few changes to a netdeck to give it a more unique feel.
What I have an issue with is people who just netdeck the best tier 1 decks all the time. It just shows you aren't in it for fun, you just want easy wins. I'd rather play a lesser deck that I enjoy even if it means losing more often.
I personally dont think it deserves criticism people do it basically in every game someone comes out with the best design for a new deck. People play against it loose it becomes tier 1. Everyone starts playing to counter that meta it moves out of tier 1. Hearths stone it seems a little harsher as the population heavily picks up the trend and follows it. Generally pretty much 90% of the decks you face after season 1 of a new meta have 23+ matching cards. In standard i like the wild format slightly more because of this because there is more originality but there is still alot of net decking.
People netdeck just to win and get the end of month loot, but they don't understand that if they do a little job for the same amount of time they play the ladder, they get waaaay more loot from this.. And they could focus on enjoy a variety of decks, win or lose would be not so important = no netdeck needy
Thats my little opinion, i'm doing that and my collection is very close to be full, the game is so enjoyable this way (:
I netdeck the decks that I enjoy and I don't think there is anything wrong with that. At the starts of KotFT I got a golden Hadronox from a pack so I wanted to use it in a deck but knew if I made the deck it would be a lot worse than a deck some pro made that plays hs like 10x more than me and is probably better at deck building than I am. So I netdecked and had some fun with a taunt druid ( that didn't suck as much as if I made it but still wasn't that good xD )
Also since the day Bloodreaver Guldan was revealed I was like I HAVE TO play it in a deck with Krul and Reno and the other wild toys. And so 1st day of KotFT came and there was no netdeck yet so I made my version. It wasn't that good ofc, didnt know exactly how many board clears to put in, how many heals , what was too greedy and what was ok greedy...etc and I was loosing more than I would like...so in a week or 2 I netdecked a list and it is my favourite deck ever ( reached legend with it in wild just for fun, I already had the card back ).
But there are also people that netdeck something just because its ,,the best deck in the meta,, and that is something I dont like. Those people I feel play only so they win not because the game itself is fun. I just cant imagine anyone having fun playing a simple deck like pirate warrior / tempo rogue / big priest and having fun if it was not for winning itself being fun for them. Highlander priest has some depth to it ( except when you god draw ) but I just dont like decks that deal more than 20 burst damage without board so I dont netdeck it.
For the wild renolock deck I crafted the krul and golden dk and didn't regret it at all ( even though its not a tier 1 deck ) but I refuse to craft patches / keleseth / velen no matter how good those decks are simply because they are not fun to me.
maybe im wrong? maybe its just something to accept and its just the fact i need to "jump on the bandwagon" let me know your thoughts.
You make three contentions.
1. Net Deckers have a bias that says that net decks are the best decks.
Response: I don't see what is especially bad or even wrong about that. Generally, "tier" decks are the result of a consensus among players as to what wins and what doesn't. Empirically, they often are the best decks. A bias for what is true is not deserving of much criticism I think. While that perhaps may make them a bit closed minded to other possibilities, it likely doesn't matter. I would be more critical of those who claim that the Netdecks are not the best decks.
2. Net Deckers are resistant to new ideas
Response: I don't think so. Net Deckers take other peoples new ideas and use them. They are actually very accepting of new ideas. What they are resistant to is minority ideas or unproven or untested ideas. A net decker wants assurance that the idea they adopt is proven to be a good idea and a winning idea. I think this is a misunderstanding on your part.
3. Net Deckers evaluate new cards in relation to the existing net decks
Response: So does nearly everyone in the competitive scene. And there is good reason for that. Often dominant decks continue from one set to another. Not always, but it is more the rule than the exception. If your interest is purely competitive, then you will naturally see things framed int he context of the top competitive conditions. It would be foolish not to make these evaluations.
Summation
It seems to me that your complaint centers on innovation. Net Dekers are not pioneers of new deck ideas and as a result are resistant to agreeing with the ideas put forward by people who like to innovate. (I suspect you see yourself as such an innovator.)
I would point out that in games like these, people find their niche. Some lead, some follow. Some innovate, some refined. Some invent, some utilize. Net Decker's like to play and they like to win. So they use proven and tested deck strategies that others have refined. They do not have a goal of innovating new decks or finding out what could be better than what is already here. They rely on others to do that for them.
I'm not sure on what basis that deserves any special critique unless you impose on them an objective (innovation) that they never sought to aspire to.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Check out my gaming blog: Downy Owlbear Designs and download free P&P games. Or argue with me about games on Qallout, the video debate site.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Now before You start with how wrong i am, i would like to make my argument and explain to you what netdecking in Cards like hearthstone and other Cards do to either player bases or the meta itself and how it makes Points of view very bias
Let me define what netdecking is before we start. Netdecking is the act of if someone sees a deck on reddit or a deck they see that wins a tournament will copy and paste it card for card based off of what they saw. Now the main motives of doing this is sometimes humans see something that gets good results for someone and they feel like they would want to have that same success, other wise known as "the bandwagon effect". The other motive is probably the fact that some people will admit they dont have the brains to make their own deck ideas and they just feel like they want to make something that will give them a good experience, kinda like the first point i made.
Now, why is netdecking a problem? The problem i see with netdecking nowadays is that players who play what is viewed as "the best deck" often have their points of views in a way where its bias towards the current tier 1 or 2 decks. This brings me to the point of where people tend to have a more jaded point of view when it comes to seeing new ideas or ways to play differently on other decks.
The other thing that gets effected by netdecking is card reviews. right now we are in a time where we will be getting over 100 cards in the meta starting in a few weeks, granted not all the cards will be good enough to be good and thats to be expected. however the problem is the players who play nothing but netdecks or meta decks have their points of view skewed in one direction of if it doesnt counter deck XYZ or build upon Deck XYZ, then its not worth trying. There has been so many sets where ive see this happen its to the point where you can tell where the lack of creative thought is happening because changes are that player only plays decks that they think is an established point of view.
I know this will not be a popular point of View to have considering im sure most of you will say there is nothing wrong with what i mentioned, and to that i would argue that you are either part of the base i was mentioning or you just dont know it. Is there something wrong with trying something based off how cool it looks to play? No, in fact i think it helps to learn what works and what doesnt. there have been a few decklists ive seen that i tried and found were interesting. The point i am making is there is a form of Tribalism in gaming where its weird to try things out for the fact of having fun.
maybe im wrong? maybe its just something to accept and its just the fact i need to "jump on the bandwagon" let me know your thoughts. one last thing, if youre gonna Comment with " people tend to netdeck cause they want to play whats good" 1, thats subjective, 2. you just proved my point.
Hearthstone is a game of "copy and pasting"
People are going to use what works. If you suck at creating decks (like I do) netdecking is the only way to assure you'll get a good rank.
There is nothing wrong with netdecking. What most of these complainers don't realise, is that there are a lot of f2p players who don't get the entire expansion every time on release day. Why wouldn't they try to build what the community considers the most efficient deck? They don't have the dust to craft whatever they want if they want to do well.
Besides, if a new player literally netdecks someone else without understanding the card choices, they will most likely be pretty bad with the deck anyway. I honestly don't get why people get so mad about it.
To your point about card reviewers, most of them are pro players who play the best decks often to practice for tournaments/achieve high legend. For that reason, they see cards within the context of the decks that are good in the meta. Of course, there are often times new decks that come from expansions, but it takes a lot to change the top dogs. For you and me, however, it is totally fine to try and think more creatively about the cards. I think most of the community placates to the streamers point of view, when for us the point of the game should be fun so non top-tier cards are reviewed too harshly.
Hearthstone is a game of "copy and pasting"
It doesn't matter what game it is, people get sick of seeing the same crap over and over and being beaten by the same dumb mechanics. In PvE games like WoW raiding, or Diablo rifts, everyone copies the best builds and tries to get strategies down. Nobody complains about that and its expected that you follow what the pros are doing. However, playing Starcraft, I've bitched about 6-poolers and in COD:MW2 "noob-tubers" were a total pain in the ass. Taking a popular, yet effective approach to the game is always going to frustrate people. People became super excited when Finja was first used in water rogue, when Mysterious Challenger was figured out and when Grim Patron's interaction was discovered in warrior. But then they became overplayed and became frustrating. So people love the thrill of a new effective discovery, they just don't want to do the discovering themselves.
tldr, salt content too high
Personally, I would define netdecking in Hearthstone as the act of copying a popular deck in the meta while only changing a small set of the cards to fit it to your collection or adapt it just a bit more to your playstyle.
This paragraph might seem random, but it leads into a point. Personally, I love to create my own decks. I've built a Wild Reno MalyMage, WOMP Shaman (Freeze Shaman), Wild Dead Man's Juggernaut Warrior, and a Wild Handbuff Paladin without Prince Keleseth. Now, I don't actually have all of the cards to any of these decks, but I still build decks because I'm not that bad at deckbuilding, and it's fun seeing my decks get used by some of the people I talk to on a regular basis. Are all of the decks I mentioned supposed to be good? No, in fact, only 2 of them are built to be competitive, but all 4 of them are ridiculously fun to play, from what I have seen. As a budget player, I practice deckbuilding because I genuinely enjoy it, and I want to improve. But, as a budget player, I don't have the collection to build a Tier 1 deck. So, when K&C releases, and the meta settles, I am going to want to build a deck that I will be able to climb the Wild ladder with. I've managed to save around 9.5k dust thanks to being able to buy around 100-140 Classic packs recently, and with that dust, I am most likely going to be forced to build a meta deck, simply because the amount of time it would take me to build another Wild deck and get it tested by my friends would be a bit long. As much as I hate to say it, I will netdeck, because I am a competitive person, and want to achieve high ranks. I will do my best to find a Tier 1/Tier S deck that suits my playstyle, and adjust it to a bit more to my preferred playstyle, but I will be netdecking once the meta settles and the meta decks reveal themselves.
I do not like netdecking, but not having a complete collection, I feel forced into doing it. If I had a full collection, you could bet money I'd build my own decks to climb with, and I personally believe people with full collections should build their own decks to climb with after achieving Rank 10/5 each season, but I think that people without the collection to do it feel forced, like I do.
If you need a Wild deck that is fun, competitive, high skill, and low RNG, check out my Highlander Malygos Deck!
You know what's worse than netdecking? These threads. We literally have another thread just like this, several pages long, on this page. Your opinion on netdecking is not so original that we need yet another topic on it.
People want to play the best decks, that's all there is to it, if you don't like netdecking play a non-competitive game.
These posts are always too general. It depends on the situation, of course the widespread net decking of certain top tier decks is degenerative but that doesn't mean everyone should be condemned for copying some lists and cards to stay competitive.
As a collector, my opinion is that netdecking is shooting yourself in the foot. You get stuck with the deck you built, and repurposing it is expensive. True, it gives you a leg up on reaching high rank, where you unlock sweet reward every month, but is the grind really worth it?
I build an awesome deck that wins a lot, but after a week I'm ready for the next thing. I have 9 viable classes with dozens of viable archetypes, even moreso in wild. It took me a solid year to learn how to craft decks, but now that I can do it well enough, I have limitless fun at my disposal.
FYI, the only cards I've crafted outside the classic set since my start during TGT are Dr boom, nzoth, and keleseth. My tempo decks do just fine without patches.
Its just like WoW with "Net-talenting"
People want the best set up.
But what matters even more is how they perform with it.
You can teach the skills but not the quality.
I've never really had an issue with netdecking but I usually try to make a few changes to a netdeck to give it a more unique feel.
What I have an issue with is people who just netdeck the best tier 1 decks all the time. It just shows you aren't in it for fun, you just want easy wins. I'd rather play a lesser deck that I enjoy even if it means losing more often.
I personally dont think it deserves criticism people do it basically in every game someone comes out with the best design for a new deck. People play against it loose it becomes tier 1. Everyone starts playing to counter that meta it moves out of tier 1. Hearths stone it seems a little harsher as the population heavily picks up the trend and follows it. Generally pretty much 90% of the decks you face after season 1 of a new meta have 23+ matching cards. In standard i like the wild format slightly more because of this because there is more originality but there is still alot of net decking.
People netdeck just to win and get the end of month loot, but they don't understand that if they do a little job for the same amount of time they play the ladder, they get waaaay more loot from this.. And they could focus on enjoy a variety of decks, win or lose would be not so important = no netdeck needy
Thats my little opinion, i'm doing that and my collection is very close to be full, the game is so enjoyable this way (:
I don't think all netdecking deserves critisism
I netdeck the decks that I enjoy and I don't think there is anything wrong with that. At the starts of KotFT I got a golden Hadronox from a pack so I wanted to use it in a deck but knew if I made the deck it would be a lot worse than a deck some pro made that plays hs like 10x more than me and is probably better at deck building than I am. So I netdecked and had some fun with a taunt druid ( that didn't suck as much as if I made it but still wasn't that good xD )
Also since the day Bloodreaver Guldan was revealed I was like I HAVE TO play it in a deck with Krul and Reno and the other wild toys. And so 1st day of KotFT came and there was no netdeck yet so I made my version. It wasn't that good ofc, didnt know exactly how many board clears to put in, how many heals , what was too greedy and what was ok greedy...etc and I was loosing more than I would like...so in a week or 2 I netdecked a list and it is my favourite deck ever ( reached legend with it in wild just for fun, I already had the card back ).
But there are also people that netdeck something just because its ,,the best deck in the meta,, and that is something I dont like. Those people I feel play only so they win not because the game itself is fun. I just cant imagine anyone having fun playing a simple deck like pirate warrior / tempo rogue / big priest and having fun if it was not for winning itself being fun for them. Highlander priest has some depth to it ( except when you god draw ) but I just dont like decks that deal more than 20 burst damage without board so I dont netdeck it.
For the wild renolock deck I crafted the krul and golden dk and didn't regret it at all ( even though its not a tier 1 deck ) but I refuse to craft patches / keleseth / velen no matter how good those decks are simply because they are not fun to me.
Check out my gaming blog: Downy Owlbear Designs and download free P&P games.
Or argue with me about games on Qallout, the video debate site.