I think this thread lacks one important point. More or less ALL existing decks has recently rotated. Ofcourse everyone will play whatever works. If you are facing 50% of the same deck and reflect upon that enough to create a thread to whine about it, then you BUILD a deck that has a benefit over that particular deck. This is generally how a meta evolves.
If you CANT build a deck that wins over a highly dominant deck? Thats not net deckings fault, then we are talking about a flaw in game design, and then its Blizzards fault.
Tldr, if you remove half the card pool you will have less deck diversity. This has nothing to do with net decking.
I wanted to check some decks from OP, but there are none in his profile...
I really wonder what creative decks he is playing, if they are just same net decks with 3 different cards, or something so unique only OP could think of it
Last 15 games, at least 6 or 7 of them were against 'Dragon Mage'. Now, I don't assume every person I play against ever is netdecking. But considering that Dragon Mage has never been a thing before and all of a sudden, I'm seeing the exact same decklist from 7 different people, I feel its safe to assume its just people netdecking.
Which, turned out to be true, as I found it to be Kibbler's list. Kind of annoying honestly, as it gets tiring to face the same decks over and over. As fun as the internet is and allowing PvP like this on a global scale, it also enables lazy people to be lazy and just copy a deck instead of experimenting on their own.
I can only imagine how much fresher this game would remain if people didn't feel the need to copy decks. And you would think its just Ranked where this happens, but no. People are netdecking in casual as well, with T2 and T1 decks. It just doesn't make sense, rip.
Yeah but on one hand, if you find a successful deck list you are gonna want to share it, people just work like that, if not to help others to get at the very least praised for your achievement. On the other hand you can't blame people for informing themselves in what is the most efficient way to invest their resources. So yeah. . It makes sense sorry
Problem is not net decking, problem is that most of the cards are trash, filler cards that wont ever be played and serve no purpose. So people will just use good cards and eventually everyone will be playing same deck...
Wherever people stand on net-decking, this fallacy inflates the issue. Aside from a few outliers in either direction, the line between a 'good card' and a 'trash card' is extremely narrow. As Reno decks have shown in the past, there's an awful lot of cards that don't get played but are actually quite good. That doesn't even touch upon how opinions change with synergies available even when the 'trash' cards have not changed at all (e.g. all of Vanish, Stonetusk Boar and Gadgetzan Ferryman rose from trash to powerful in the blink on an eye when Un'Goro was released).
The people who climb to rank 5 or legend each month, sure, they are clearly concerned with optimising performance and are liable to net-deck. But the majority of players don't do that. They chill out at lower ranks and still net-deck, where they could maintain a perfectly respectable win rate if they recognised that 'trash' cards are still perfectly playable.
There is a connected discussion about F2P players and whether they have the freedom to do this. With epics and legendaries it can be tricky for them, but I imagine they have a whole bunch of playable commons and rares (and a few of higher rarities) that they won't touch because they are falsely perceived as 'trash'.
People netdeck simply because they don't want to spend more time on finding synergy. I am both a homebrewed and netdecked person. I netdeck when I am not physically cleared to make a deck. I homebrew when I want to freshen things up after working hours. Eventually, without my opponent netdecking, it is harder for me to beat them. My wins are increasing thanks to beating netdeckers. :3
Access to online networks just speeds up the inevitability of what would come naturally even if online access to card decks and discussions weren't a thing.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
You think I have infinite fucking dust or something?
I think this thread lacks one important point. More or less ALL existing decks has recently rotated. Ofcourse everyone will play whatever works. If you are facing 50% of the same deck and reflect upon that enough to create a thread to whine about it, then you BUILD a deck that has a benefit over that particular deck. This is generally how a meta evolves.
If you CANT build a deck that wins over a highly dominant deck? Thats not net deckings fault, then we are talking about a flaw in game design, and then its Blizzards fault.
Tldr, if you remove half the card pool you will have less deck diversity. This has nothing to do with net decking.
I wanted to check some decks from OP, but there are none in his profile...
I really wonder what creative decks he is playing, if they are just same net decks with 3 different cards, or something so unique only OP could think of it
Yeah but on one hand, if you find a successful deck list you are gonna want to share it, people just work like that, if not to help others to get at the very least praised for your achievement. On the other hand you can't blame people for informing themselves in what is the most efficient way to invest their resources. So yeah. . It makes sense sorry
Wherever people stand on net-decking, this fallacy inflates the issue. Aside from a few outliers in either direction, the line between a 'good card' and a 'trash card' is extremely narrow. As Reno decks have shown in the past, there's an awful lot of cards that don't get played but are actually quite good. That doesn't even touch upon how opinions change with synergies available even when the 'trash' cards have not changed at all (e.g. all of Vanish, Stonetusk Boar and Gadgetzan Ferryman rose from trash to powerful in the blink on an eye when Un'Goro was released).
The people who climb to rank 5 or legend each month, sure, they are clearly concerned with optimising performance and are liable to net-deck. But the majority of players don't do that. They chill out at lower ranks and still net-deck, where they could maintain a perfectly respectable win rate if they recognised that 'trash' cards are still perfectly playable.
There is a connected discussion about F2P players and whether they have the freedom to do this. With epics and legendaries it can be tricky for them, but I imagine they have a whole bunch of playable commons and rares (and a few of higher rarities) that they won't touch because they are falsely perceived as 'trash'.
People netdeck simply because they don't want to spend more time on finding synergy.
I am both a homebrewed and netdecked person. I netdeck when I am not physically cleared to make a deck. I homebrew when I want to freshen things up after working hours.
Eventually, without my opponent netdecking, it is harder for me to beat them. My wins are increasing thanks to beating netdeckers. :3
Access to online networks just speeds up the inevitability of what would come naturally even if online access to card decks and discussions weren't a thing.