The beginning of the end of net.decs?

[Killer Joe]

I have always been interested in "Net Decks", having copped to that, I must say that the habit of doing so isn't as strong in me as before, why? I can't find them, or so I thought.

The Dojo (R.I.P.) was my choice of habit, it fell and like Rome, time went on; I could go to the deck section here, at StarCity, the Sideboard, Mindripper, a plethora of places. But now, I can't seem to be as connected with these places as before, and I thought it was because I couldn't find them or something, then it hit me. I wasn't looking for them anymore!

Now mind you, I am still committed to being on the Road to Tourneyland, I'm just not taking the "Express" train to get there. I think I have reached a plane of thinking that allows me not to define myself by such idealisims such as Tourney/Casual player or whatnot.

Don't get me wrong, I still want to be a fierce competetor as well as a multi-player affectionato. I just don't think I should have to wear a badge defining me as either. Does that make sense?

So, ask me which side of the fence is greener, and I'll tell you about a place where there ARE no fences .

 

[Almindhra]

I would say I don't really like the idea of net decks...But how can you get around them?...You're always going to be looking for ideas on how to break Deadapult, and Jon Finkel's latest crushing deck, but who likes to go to a tournament and see everyone playing the same 2 decks?...Its nice to have that feeling of creating a broken deck on your own...

But people are always going to copy the good decks that are out there...Its smart...

 

[Gizmo]

Welcome to the club. I`m constantly irritated by the nasty infighting that occurs between casual and pro when the distinction is purely self-imposed. Casual players feel better than Pro players, Pro players feel better than Casual players.

Arrogance personified.

I`m a Magic player. Don`t know if that makes me a Pro or a Casual player. Guess that`s up to you to define.

 

[Chaos Turtle]

Myself, I don't play enugh tournaments for it to matter (too far to drive) but when I do, I play the best deck I can find that I feel comfortable with, in terms of understanding how it works and how to handle matchups. (I do lots of research online).

But when it comes to the local Arena season, I just chill and enjoy myself. I play to win, but I put my own little "fun" spin on things to do it. For example, the entire last five weeks, I played the basic guts of a Skies deck, with parts of it replaced with red for Seal of Fire, Eartquake and Hammer of Bogardan* (I later removed the Seals as I came to the conclusion that they suck in the deck).

I played the deck to a second-place finish, and had loads of fun doing it. The best fun, which happened three times over the season, was seeing the look on my opponents faces when I bombed the table with a sideboarded Jokulhaups when the games turned very ugly for me. To snatch victory from what they'd assumed was a helpless situation... well, all I got to say is, "LOL!"

*(God, I will miss this amazing card in Standard... bye Big H)

 

[Gizmo]

21 gun salute to the passing of the great Hammer.
I nearly cried when I finally came to trade mine away - I got four before Mirage was even released, and only traded thema way last month. A sad day.

 

[NeuroDeus]

Gizmo he wasn't (I think) referring to the Hammer but he was referring to the Haups aka Jokulhaups

 

[Hetemti]

I don't play tournaments, save the pre-res, so it doesn't matter...

...but were I to play a T2 competitivly, I'd not dismiss net decks. I'll look for a common thread that unites any and all dominant archtypes, and see if I can pull the thread with my deck, and sit back and giggle as they fall appart, but if I can't, netdeck's the way to go.

 

[Salacious Crumb]

LIke i always say on the subject, i'm casual...
I don't really listen to net decks. I can't make them, since i only have fallen empires cards!
I have the whole set

hoipa

 

[Cateran Emperor]

I stopped my crusade against netdecking about half a year ago when Invasion came out and general pandemonium hit the format. I simply don't care if you use them anymore or not, there are far too many strong concepts right now to rule out any original decks.

It's funny, but when I hear someone on some other board laughing at casual decks or mocking cards, I simply stand aside and someone else with argue with them.

I guess our work is done for the time being. Time to sit back and enjoy with some T1 Pentagon.

 

[Chaos Turtle]

You're kidding, right? I meant Hammer. (Check out the little asterisks' locations.)

Haups is an interesting loss, but not a shocking and dramatic one like 'Geddon or Hammer. These would illustrate that situation where what is missing from an environment is as important as what isn't, as far as defining the "character" of that environment.

Gizmo, please say you didn't trade away all of your Hammers! Don't you think they will be useful in extended? The drop-off of the original duals is pretty much a given, I think, and the rotation out of the Ice Age block can't be more than a year behind. Won't this leave a big hole that can be filled by a nice fat Counterburn deck? I think there's at least a chance of that... and Hammer... it's... it's...

*snif*

Oh god, it's gone!

Chaos Turtle heads over to eBay and does a search for "sackcloth and ashes."

Mise well get ready for it...

 

[Spiderman]

I've said it before and I'll say it again: net decks are not bad, they are a tool that is available to any Magic player. What better way of testing your deck against those that have been proven to win? If you can't test against people in real life, the next best thing is to proxy them up and see how they play. This is assuming that you're heck-bent on playing your own deck anyways.

And if you need a quick deck, I don't see what's wrong with grabbing one either. In this scenario, presumably you haven't tested with it much against other net decks or decks period, so how you play is up to you. Either you win and obviously your opponents' weren't well-prepared, or you lose and it's YOU who weren't well-prepared (excluding obvious manafloods or screws). <shrug> You get what you "pay" for.

 

[Salacious Crumb]

HAh, i remember when TICM built a proxy deck from a bunch of note cards...

Now, THAT was entertainment

Hoipa

 

[Zadok001]

Netdecks? I never really 'got' the argument, myself. I know a few netdeckers (not within my regular play group, though), and honestly, who cares? If you can't build a deck, chances are, you can't play it either. If you CAN play it, you can't play it without tons of practice, and if you practice that much, chances are, you change the deck! Exuent netdeck.

Tired. Speaking nonsense.

 

[Duel]

Netdecks are dead in T2. Too many decks, too many variants, too many kooks spoil the broth. Because everyone and their kid brother has a pet deck which can run 40% against some of the best decks out there, netdecks can lose to rogue in a flash, and what's the point of a netdeck if it doesn't give you a winning record?

 

[Gizmo]

ROFLMAO

 

[Duel]

*Duel looks around*

Not sure whether I should be pleased or insulted...

*Duel scratches his head*

 

[Neil Rigby]

I think Gizmo is trying to say that your observation about netdecks being dead in type 2 is not entirely acurate. You also mention that netdecks can lose to rogue decks in a flash, whilst not entirely incorrect, this again happens very infrequently. A well played and built FIRES deck (for example) will give about a 90% win ratio against RANDOMPUNTER.DEC

I am neither for nor against netdecks as until recently I have not had easy access to the web and now that I have it, I cannot be arsed searching for them (I leave that to the deck building part of our team).

I don't think that netdecks are a problem, because most of them have been built by "pro's" for the "pro" circuit and almost all of them require a decent level of play skill to acheive the best results from them so they will not be as scary in local tourneys but they do give people ideas and things to test against so lets just let them be.

Half of this probably doesn't make sense but it's first thing in the morning so leave me alone

 

[Spiderman]

When you say "randompunter.dec", do you mean a deck someone scraped up on the way to the tourney, or some deck that someone has tested extensively against "known decks" like Fires and is confident but just hasn't been seen yet (new deck or tech or whatever)? 'Cause I think a "rogue deck" describes both cases...

 

[Duel]

Okay, look at it like this:

Someone who just downloaded and built fires, and has no changes and hasn't played it extensively will beat someone who grabbed 40 blue cards and 20 islands and walked into the tournament.

Someone who has a finely-tuned Fires deck and is an experienced player will most likely go 60/40 with a well-developed, tested, and sideboarded "Turboarmistice.dec" that has been played thoroughly. Why? Because they know, in general, what they're up against, and because fires is not a dominating deck. It is a good structure.

So, fires provides a good framework, but there is no definitive deck.

 

[Hellion]

Hammer of Bogardan, Armageddon, Crusade and Bad Moon.

These are some cards that have value to almost any player even when they leave Type 2. You can still use these cards in Extended or Type 1. To me, these are the cards that allow me to make the basic decks like Weenie, Control Burn and White Control.

Too bad these cards have to leave Type 2. I'm still looking for Hammers and Armageddon even I'm playing Magic for 4 years. Anyways, I hate players who play net decks during casual play, it's kind of insulting when you are all hyped for a few hours of fun when your friend decides to play his net.deck Trix against your ultra fun Deadapult/Zombie deck.

Net.decks are for tourney testing only......dun beat other players black and blue during casual play unless they specifically ask for it.....