(Before I start, I refer to 'scrubs' a couple times in the below - for definition and explanation, see http://www.sirlin.net/ptw-book/introducingthe-scrub - it's something I found probably close to 2 decades ago now, and is as valid today as it was back then)
In a recent thread a lot of posters were complaining about players, presumably in ranked, netdecking. Things like "I only rope if my opponent is playing a netdeck; in that case they deserve it" or "netdeckers deserve every bit of BM that comes their way".
Now, there are times when this might be an appropriate call to make. Mainly, if the environment you're playing in isn't competitive - which will generally be something like a match with someone on your friends list. This isn't the case for ranked, which is a competitive mode.
When it comes to playing a game competitively - Hearthstone in this case, but it applies to most competitive games - using every legal (game rules and otherwise) tool at your disposal is what the best players will do. Creating arbitrary rules to challenge yourself like "use only homebrew decks" or "win without epic of legendary cards" is fine, but you enter scrub-territory when you try to impose those rules on other competitive players. There is absolutely nothing wrong with using the research of players that came before you in order to gain as much advantage as possible against the competition. Doing so means you're making effective use of the tools available.
Sure, you may feel annoyed if you lose to someone that's using the flavour of the month netdeck and made some pretty obvious misplays, and you may feel like the deck carried them. Maybe it did - but so what? It was a legitimate win. Whether it was the matchup, the draws, the plays or whatnot, the stars aligned in such a way that they won - and that's fine. Using a netdeck is not some secret advantage that player alone has - if you don't want to use one that's totally fine too, but it's bad form (and again, symptomatic of a scrub mentality) if you decry their victory just because they chose to use a deck that, in all likelihood, has proven to be strong in the metagame.
If the issue is because you don't actually want to play in a competitive environment, and would rather play in a more relaxed environment with more casual archetypes (and believe me, I know - kitchen table Magic is far more preferable to me than competitive events), then that's not an issue with people netdecking - that's an issue with Blizzard not offering such an environment (casual would be more accurately titled 'unranked', and while you can find friends online that will play casual decks with you, it's a bit like Destiny in that they make you do the legwork for multiplayer fun).
As another example, the first RTS I wanted to actually get good at (as opposed to just playing against the AI and taking advantage of their issues) was Starcraft 2. And when I first started out - hell, pretty much the whole time I played - I took advantage of build orders that others had submitted online. That's effectively the Starcraft/RTS version of netdecking (a build order basically defines what you build in the early game, where the decision tree is generally so narrow that you can refine a reliable opening to springboard into later stages of the game). As a new player, was I just supposed to head into games and flail about, hoping for the best? I would have stayed in bronze for much longer if I had taken that approach!
To sum up - there's nothing wrong with a player wanting to use every legal tool at their disposal, and taking inspiration (either partial or entire deck-wise) from players that came before them. Not only is it fair game, but if they're trying to be as competitive as possible it makes sense to identify and use the best deck for the current metagame. If you don't want to netdeck and want to impose the challenge on yourself to use only homebrews, that's totally fine and good luck with it! But to try and impose that rule on others when it isn't actually a rule within the game is a scrub-like mindset.
(Before I start, I refer to 'scrubs' a couple times in the below - for definition and explanation, see http://www.sirlin.net/ptw-book/introducingthe-scrub - it's something I found probably close to 2 decades ago now, and is as valid today as it was back then)
In a recent thread a lot of posters were complaining about players, presumably in ranked, netdecking. Things like "I only rope if my opponent is playing a netdeck; in that case they deserve it" or "netdeckers deserve every bit of BM that comes their way".
Now, there are times when this might be an appropriate call to make. Mainly, if the environment you're playing in isn't competitive - which will generally be something like a match with someone on your friends list. This isn't the case for ranked, which is a competitive mode.
When it comes to playing a game competitively - Hearthstone in this case, but it applies to most competitive games - using every legal (game rules and otherwise) tool at your disposal is what the best players will do. Creating arbitrary rules to challenge yourself like "use only homebrew decks" or "win without epic of legendary cards" is fine, but you enter scrub-territory when you try to impose those rules on other competitive players. There is absolutely nothing wrong with using the research of players that came before you in order to gain as much advantage as possible against the competition. Doing so means you're making effective use of the tools available.
Sure, you may feel annoyed if you lose to someone that's using the flavour of the month netdeck and made some pretty obvious misplays, and you may feel like the deck carried them. Maybe it did - but so what? It was a legitimate win. Whether it was the matchup, the draws, the plays or whatnot, the stars aligned in such a way that they won - and that's fine. Using a netdeck is not some secret advantage that player alone has - if you don't want to use one that's totally fine too, but it's bad form (and again, symptomatic of a scrub mentality) if you decry their victory just because they chose to use a deck that, in all likelihood, has proven to be strong in the metagame.
If the issue is because you don't actually want to play in a competitive environment, and would rather play in a more relaxed environment with more casual archetypes (and believe me, I know - kitchen table Magic is far more preferable to me than competitive events), then that's not an issue with people netdecking - that's an issue with Blizzard not offering such an environment (casual would be more accurately titled 'unranked', and while you can find friends online that will play casual decks with you, it's a bit like Destiny in that they make you do the legwork for multiplayer fun).
As another example, the first RTS I wanted to actually get good at (as opposed to just playing against the AI and taking advantage of their issues) was Starcraft 2. And when I first started out - hell, pretty much the whole time I played - I took advantage of build orders that others had submitted online. That's effectively the Starcraft/RTS version of netdecking (a build order basically defines what you build in the early game, where the decision tree is generally so narrow that you can refine a reliable opening to springboard into later stages of the game). As a new player, was I just supposed to head into games and flail about, hoping for the best? I would have stayed in bronze for much longer if I had taken that approach!
To sum up - there's nothing wrong with a player wanting to use every legal tool at their disposal, and taking inspiration (either partial or entire deck-wise) from players that came before them. Not only is it fair game, but if they're trying to be as competitive as possible it makes sense to identify and use the best deck for the current metagame. If you don't want to netdeck and want to impose the challenge on yourself to use only homebrews, that's totally fine and good luck with it! But to try and impose that rule on others when it isn't actually a rule within the game is a scrub-like mindset.
I actually like a very narrow environment of decks. It allows one to build specialised decks to counter those. Also it increases the skill ceiling because you know what to expect from the enemy deck and can play around it. Both is not possible in a wide and random arrangement of decks.
Also I hate the beginning of a new meta when top decks have not settled yet, when everybody and their grandma builds the greediest decks ever with soooo much lategame value that playing any kind of balanced slow deck becomes impossible. This is usually the only time I switch to face aggro decks until the lategame greed subsides.
I agree with this 100%. In addition players who don't have the resources to experiment are almost forced to netdeck if you want to be somewhat succesful.
Don't even need to get into this being correct or not - how is a forum a void? I'm not the only active person here. If you want to try and paint it as a void because I brought the topic up - well, it's a branch from a previous topic (I believe that one was about roping, which should be near the top).
I'm not sure why we need to address the issue. There will always be purists moaning about netdecking, but frankly they're in the minority and who cares what they think.
in "competitive environments" is it fine to ROB too? i dont think so
because that's what this ridicolous meta with its ridicolous cards and decks brings, possibility to rob many games. this is also sadly what people truly enjoy.
i'm curious to know, if you are f.e. a team sport supporter, if you are happy when a team robs a game or a championship. i bet answer is yes if it's the team you support, huh? but unfortunately that's not right thing nor a meaningful thing. and that's not real competition which is FAIR.
in "competitive environments" is it fine to ROB too? i dont think so
because that's what this ridicolous meta with its ridicolous cards and decks brings, possibility to rob many games. this is also sadly what people truly enjoy.
i'm curious to know, if you are f.e. a team sport supporter, if you are happy when a team robs a game or a championship. i bet answer is yes if it's the team you support, huh? but unfortunately that's not right thing nor a meaningful thing. and that's not real competition which is FAIR.
Well, to begin with, you have to define what 'rob' is? I'm guessing you're defining it as a player winning a game they shouldn't have, or didn't deserve to? Then, the more important question is why shouldn't they have, or why didn't they deserve to?
I'd be curious if there's a good answer for that. If person A is playering the best deck in the meta and they netdecked it, and they play against opponent X who's running a homebrew, they didn't steal a win - via the non-random actions of both players and the random actions involved in the game, it just so happened that player had the factors align to award them a win.
I do like a few team sports, and I do agree that in some cases a game can be argued to have been stolen - but there's one huge difference between, say, soccer and Hearthstone - soccer is a non-digital game that is officiated by fallible people, whereas Hearthstone is a digital system with a pretty strict set of rules (bugs aside, but they're usually dealt with fairly quickly). I can't think of many situations where a player might legitimately steal a win in Hearthstone (maybe if there's a never-before-seen bug that gives them an unfair advantage), but there are definitely situations in soccer where, thanks to people being much more fallible than machines, wins have been stolen (hand of god as the obvious example). I for one am a big fan of the VARS system - I've always thought that tradition shouldn't get in the way of advancement. Anything that reduces fallibility is a good thing.
I'm not entirely sure why there are so many snarky, dismissive comments here, since there really do seem to be a ton of people on the site who claim that netdecking is wrong or unfair. As a result, this is something I've thought about a lot too, and I appreciate your thoughts.
In running with the team sports analogy, complaining about netdecking as cheap or unfair feels akin to saying that an NFL team shouldn't watch tape and adjust their scheme even though the best teams run entirely different systems than they do. Seems odd to expect people to handicap themselves that way.
(Context, for whatever it's worth, is that I tend to play netdecks that I find fun until I hit rank 5, then I use homebrew decks just for kicks.)
Lol. Who tf ropes when opponent netdeck? Such a moron. If they are testing something, they have to be prepared that there would be failure. It's science, if you test and success then you are just lucky. Just like committing to themselves that the deck they build is weaker than a netdeck. Even more retarded when do it in rank. Btw, there are still plenty of people netdeck yet still stuck at rank 15, while some people try a meme/tier 3, 4 deck and hit legend (nah jk, only happen in wild), so it's kinda skill as well.
(Before I start, I refer to 'scrubs' a couple times in the below - for definition and explanation, see http://www.sirlin.net/ptw-book/introducingthe-scrub - it's something I found probably close to 2 decades ago now, and is as valid today as it was back then)
In a recent thread a lot of posters were complaining about players, presumably in ranked, netdecking. Things like "I only rope if my opponent is playing a netdeck; in that case they deserve it" or "netdeckers deserve every bit of BM that comes their way".
Now, there are times when this might be an appropriate call to make. Mainly, if the environment you're playing in isn't competitive - which will generally be something like a match with someone on your friends list. This isn't the case for ranked, which is a competitive mode.
When it comes to playing a game competitively - Hearthstone in this case, but it applies to most competitive games - using every legal (game rules and otherwise) tool at your disposal is what the best players will do. Creating arbitrary rules to challenge yourself like "use only homebrew decks" or "win without epic of legendary cards" is fine, but you enter scrub-territory when you try to impose those rules on other competitive players. There is absolutely nothing wrong with using the research of players that came before you in order to gain as much advantage as possible against the competition. Doing so means you're making effective use of the tools available.
Sure, you may feel annoyed if you lose to someone that's using the flavour of the month netdeck and made some pretty obvious misplays, and you may feel like the deck carried them. Maybe it did - but so what? It was a legitimate win. Whether it was the matchup, the draws, the plays or whatnot, the stars aligned in such a way that they won - and that's fine. Using a netdeck is not some secret advantage that player alone has - if you don't want to use one that's totally fine too, but it's bad form (and again, symptomatic of a scrub mentality) if you decry their victory just because they chose to use a deck that, in all likelihood, has proven to be strong in the metagame.
If the issue is because you don't actually want to play in a competitive environment, and would rather play in a more relaxed environment with more casual archetypes (and believe me, I know - kitchen table Magic is far more preferable to me than competitive events), then that's not an issue with people netdecking - that's an issue with Blizzard not offering such an environment (casual would be more accurately titled 'unranked', and while you can find friends online that will play casual decks with you, it's a bit like Destiny in that they make you do the legwork for multiplayer fun).
As another example, the first RTS I wanted to actually get good at (as opposed to just playing against the AI and taking advantage of their issues) was Starcraft 2. And when I first started out - hell, pretty much the whole time I played - I took advantage of build orders that others had submitted online. That's effectively the Starcraft/RTS version of netdecking (a build order basically defines what you build in the early game, where the decision tree is generally so narrow that you can refine a reliable opening to springboard into later stages of the game). As a new player, was I just supposed to head into games and flail about, hoping for the best? I would have stayed in bronze for much longer if I had taken that approach!
To sum up - there's nothing wrong with a player wanting to use every legal tool at their disposal, and taking inspiration (either partial or entire deck-wise) from players that came before them. Not only is it fair game, but if they're trying to be as competitive as possible it makes sense to identify and use the best deck for the current metagame. If you don't want to netdeck and want to impose the challenge on yourself to use only homebrews, that's totally fine and good luck with it! But to try and impose that rule on others when it isn't actually a rule within the game is a scrub-like mindset.
Netdecking gets annoying for me when the meta is stale or not varied because in those cases you are playing the same games over and over and over.
But an important thing to note is that other players are not responsible for you to have fun. YOU are. If you are not having fun, YOU should change something up to have fun again or play something else you do find fun. Remember that other players are probably playing with netdecked decks because they enjoy doing so. And that’s exactly what they should be doing. Enjoying the game.
I actually like a very narrow environment of decks. It allows one to build specialised decks to counter those. Also it increases the skill ceiling because you know what to expect from the enemy deck and can play around it. Both is not possible in a wide and random arrangement of decks.
Also I hate the beginning of a new meta when top decks have not settled yet, when everybody and their grandma builds the greediest decks ever with soooo much lategame value that playing any kind of balanced slow deck becomes impossible. This is usually the only time I switch to face aggro decks until the lategame greed subsides.
I can't argue with what you like, but a narrow environment actually decreases skill because everyone and their mom knows what the other guy is playing by turn 2 if they're netdecking. Being able to adapt to an unfamiliar situation is the hallmark of a skilled player, whereas following the same cookie cutter situation you've been in a hundred times before isn't skill, it's rote memory.
People who complain about net decking are amusing. Thing is, there's a "best" combination of cards per class that execute the intended strategy. Just because someone with a higher than average mind for deck crafting comes up with it first does not forbid others to utilize it.
That's like forbidding anyone else from making apple pie just because someone else made it first.
As for the "fun" factor, it is completely arbitrary. If winning=fun for someone, don't fault them for utilizing the best tools to win. Just like I wouldn't fault you for playing a homebrew for the same reasons. But you then cannot fault someone who likes winning for not including "meh" cards in their deck just because others are not.
Bottom line, this is a card game, and being first to an amazing combination of cards doesn't entitle others to not enjoy the same.
Side note: If someone net decks and then claims the work their own, that is another story entirely. Those people are trash and you can have at em.
Netdecking is going to happen whether you like it or not. People are going to use what works - Why should I try to make my own deck and lose constantly if I find a deck that works for me?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
(Before I start, I refer to 'scrubs' a couple times in the below - for definition and explanation, see http://www.sirlin.net/ptw-book/introducingthe-scrub - it's something I found probably close to 2 decades ago now, and is as valid today as it was back then)
In a recent thread a lot of posters were complaining about players, presumably in ranked, netdecking. Things like "I only rope if my opponent is playing a netdeck; in that case they deserve it" or "netdeckers deserve every bit of BM that comes their way".
Now, there are times when this might be an appropriate call to make. Mainly, if the environment you're playing in isn't competitive - which will generally be something like a match with someone on your friends list. This isn't the case for ranked, which is a competitive mode.
When it comes to playing a game competitively - Hearthstone in this case, but it applies to most competitive games - using every legal (game rules and otherwise) tool at your disposal is what the best players will do. Creating arbitrary rules to challenge yourself like "use only homebrew decks" or "win without epic of legendary cards" is fine, but you enter scrub-territory when you try to impose those rules on other competitive players. There is absolutely nothing wrong with using the research of players that came before you in order to gain as much advantage as possible against the competition. Doing so means you're making effective use of the tools available.
Sure, you may feel annoyed if you lose to someone that's using the flavour of the month netdeck and made some pretty obvious misplays, and you may feel like the deck carried them. Maybe it did - but so what? It was a legitimate win. Whether it was the matchup, the draws, the plays or whatnot, the stars aligned in such a way that they won - and that's fine. Using a netdeck is not some secret advantage that player alone has - if you don't want to use one that's totally fine too, but it's bad form (and again, symptomatic of a scrub mentality) if you decry their victory just because they chose to use a deck that, in all likelihood, has proven to be strong in the metagame.
If the issue is because you don't actually want to play in a competitive environment, and would rather play in a more relaxed environment with more casual archetypes (and believe me, I know - kitchen table Magic is far more preferable to me than competitive events), then that's not an issue with people netdecking - that's an issue with Blizzard not offering such an environment (casual would be more accurately titled 'unranked', and while you can find friends online that will play casual decks with you, it's a bit like Destiny in that they make you do the legwork for multiplayer fun).
As another example, the first RTS I wanted to actually get good at (as opposed to just playing against the AI and taking advantage of their issues) was Starcraft 2. And when I first started out - hell, pretty much the whole time I played - I took advantage of build orders that others had submitted online. That's effectively the Starcraft/RTS version of netdecking (a build order basically defines what you build in the early game, where the decision tree is generally so narrow that you can refine a reliable opening to springboard into later stages of the game). As a new player, was I just supposed to head into games and flail about, hoping for the best? I would have stayed in bronze for much longer if I had taken that approach!
To sum up - there's nothing wrong with a player wanting to use every legal tool at their disposal, and taking inspiration (either partial or entire deck-wise) from players that came before them. Not only is it fair game, but if they're trying to be as competitive as possible it makes sense to identify and use the best deck for the current metagame. If you don't want to netdeck and want to impose the challenge on yourself to use only homebrews, that's totally fine and good luck with it! But to try and impose that rule on others when it isn't actually a rule within the game is a scrub-like mindset.
Find a doctor.
Ok
Nice post :)
Shouting into the void is a scrub-like mindset.
I actually like a very narrow environment of decks. It allows one to build specialised decks to counter those. Also it increases the skill ceiling because you know what to expect from the enemy deck and can play around it. Both is not possible in a wide and random arrangement of decks.
Also I hate the beginning of a new meta when top decks have not settled yet, when everybody and their grandma builds the greediest decks ever with soooo much lategame value that playing any kind of balanced slow deck becomes impossible. This is usually the only time I switch to face aggro decks until the lategame greed subsides.
I agree with this 100%. In addition players who don't have the resources to experiment are almost forced to netdeck if you want to be somewhat succesful.
Don't even need to get into this being correct or not - how is a forum a void? I'm not the only active person here. If you want to try and paint it as a void because I brought the topic up - well, it's a branch from a previous topic (I believe that one was about roping, which should be near the top).
Nice try though. :-D
I'm not sure why we need to address the issue. There will always be purists moaning about netdecking, but frankly they're in the minority and who cares what they think.
OP, apparently.
in "competitive environments" is it fine to ROB too? i dont think so
because that's what this ridicolous meta with its ridicolous cards and decks brings, possibility to rob many games. this is also sadly what people truly enjoy.
i'm curious to know, if you are f.e. a team sport supporter, if you are happy when a team robs a game or a championship. i bet answer is yes if it's the team you support, huh? but unfortunately that's not right thing nor a meaningful thing. and that's not real competition which is FAIR.
Well, to begin with, you have to define what 'rob' is? I'm guessing you're defining it as a player winning a game they shouldn't have, or didn't deserve to? Then, the more important question is why shouldn't they have, or why didn't they deserve to?
I'd be curious if there's a good answer for that. If person A is playering the best deck in the meta and they netdecked it, and they play against opponent X who's running a homebrew, they didn't steal a win - via the non-random actions of both players and the random actions involved in the game, it just so happened that player had the factors align to award them a win.
I do like a few team sports, and I do agree that in some cases a game can be argued to have been stolen - but there's one huge difference between, say, soccer and Hearthstone - soccer is a non-digital game that is officiated by fallible people, whereas Hearthstone is a digital system with a pretty strict set of rules (bugs aside, but they're usually dealt with fairly quickly). I can't think of many situations where a player might legitimately steal a win in Hearthstone (maybe if there's a never-before-seen bug that gives them an unfair advantage), but there are definitely situations in soccer where, thanks to people being much more fallible than machines, wins have been stolen (hand of god as the obvious example). I for one am a big fan of the VARS system - I've always thought that tradition shouldn't get in the way of advancement. Anything that reduces fallibility is a good thing.
This reminds me of a WhatsApp message I got from a crazy coworker.
Yeah I'm sorry I took your pen without asking, I don't need a 40 page essay
I'm not entirely sure why there are so many snarky, dismissive comments here, since there really do seem to be a ton of people on the site who claim that netdecking is wrong or unfair. As a result, this is something I've thought about a lot too, and I appreciate your thoughts.
In running with the team sports analogy, complaining about netdecking as cheap or unfair feels akin to saying that an NFL team shouldn't watch tape and adjust their scheme even though the best teams run entirely different systems than they do. Seems odd to expect people to handicap themselves that way.
(Context, for whatever it's worth, is that I tend to play netdecks that I find fun until I hit rank 5, then I use homebrew decks just for kicks.)
Lol. Who tf ropes when opponent netdeck? Such a moron. If they are testing something, they have to be prepared that there would be failure. It's science, if you test and success then you are just lucky. Just like committing to themselves that the deck they build is weaker than a netdeck. Even more retarded when do it in rank. Btw, there are still plenty of people netdeck yet still stuck at rank 15, while some people try a meme/tier 3, 4 deck and hit legend (nah jk, only happen in wild), so it's kinda skill as well.
GOOD STUFF! :)
Netdecking gets annoying for me when the meta is stale or not varied because in those cases you are playing the same games over and over and over.
But an important thing to note is that other players are not responsible for you to have fun. YOU are. If you are not having fun, YOU should change something up to have fun again or play something else you do find fun. Remember that other players are probably playing with netdecked decks because they enjoy doing so. And that’s exactly what they should be doing. Enjoying the game.
I can't argue with what you like, but a narrow environment actually decreases skill because everyone and their mom knows what the other guy is playing by turn 2 if they're netdecking. Being able to adapt to an unfamiliar situation is the hallmark of a skilled player, whereas following the same cookie cutter situation you've been in a hundred times before isn't skill, it's rote memory.
People who complain about net decking are amusing. Thing is, there's a "best" combination of cards per class that execute the intended strategy. Just because someone with a higher than average mind for deck crafting comes up with it first does not forbid others to utilize it.
That's like forbidding anyone else from making apple pie just because someone else made it first.
As for the "fun" factor, it is completely arbitrary. If winning=fun for someone, don't fault them for utilizing the best tools to win. Just like I wouldn't fault you for playing a homebrew for the same reasons. But you then cannot fault someone who likes winning for not including "meh" cards in their deck just because others are not.
Bottom line, this is a card game, and being first to an amazing combination of cards doesn't entitle others to not enjoy the same.
Side note: If someone net decks and then claims the work their own, that is another story entirely. Those people are trash and you can have at em.
Netdecking is going to happen whether you like it or not. People are going to use what works - Why should I try to make my own deck and lose constantly if I find a deck that works for me?