GASP: July Game Day

[Killer Joe]

This is the forum to respond to my article that will be on the front page within a day or two.

Please comment after reading it.

I'm also going to attempt to use a link.

 

[Spiderman]

Do you mean you want a link in your article to this thread? I can do that if you haven't already...

 

[Killer Joe]

I submitted the article to you on Monday night and I put a link on the article at the very bottom. Maybe you could fancy it up by changing it from the long address to "here" or something like that.

 

[Spiderman]

Okay, it'll probably go up Thursday.

 

[Oversoul]

Article? Must not be up yet...

 

[Spiderman]

Indeed, see my previous post for when it will be on the front page.

 

[Oversoul]

I did see it actually. I just don't know what day it is...

Well, now I know it's Wednesday...

I was more confused though about having a forum thread for an article (something that is unusual to begin with) that hasn't been posted on the frontpage yet. Something different, I would assume. But I guess we'll all see tomorrow...

 

[Spiderman]

Yeah, it is a bit unusual, but I think KJ wanted the url so he could put it into his article, rather than a placeholder like "Thread reply link to be coming soon" or something like that

 

[Killer Joe]

Hey Spidey, is there anyway to get the link to come right to this particular thread? The name of this thread doesn't exactly correlate with the name of the article.

 

[Spiderman]

Done.

 

[Oversoul]

I think the term netdecking is kind of absurd anyway...

Where do you draw the line? Most players who bring up netdecking are either...

A: Worrying that they might have netdecked...

B: Screaming about a deck they lost to being a netdeck, regardless of whether it is or not...

 

[Spiderman]

I agree. For some reason, the people who complain have a notion that their opponents should be playing "original" decks unless they're in a tourney format where "netdecking" is more expected. But with the thousands of players playing, you figure the same ideas on how to use cards pop up in several places and people build the same idea decks anyways.

Plus, "netdecking" really means "spreading the decklist really fast". Before the popularity of the Net, you still had "spread-decking", it just happened slower. You had to wait until that guy who went to GenCon came back with stories of cool decks or the Duelist came out with the Championship deck or you finally finangled the decklist of "The Deck" from the guy who got it from the guy who got it from the guy who got it from the guy who played Brian Weissman (or saw the match). Now, the information is spread almost the same day, but it's still the same thing from the beginnings of Magic.

 

[Killer Joe]

ORGG: A "Xerox" copied deck from the net is a net deck? I always thought that even if you used just the essence of a deck from the internet that it would be considered a net deck.

For instance, I have played Nether-Go many times from when it was type II legal. I used two Nether Spirits and four Counterspells, the rest I tailored to my taste. But I had always called it a net deck because I had used the essence of the deck; the spirit & counterspell. A 'version', if you will.

I have done this to many of my decks because in my opinion an exact copy didn't always fit my play-style (and in some cases I just couldn't get the needed cards).

The last time I used an exact copy (Xerox) was a Rising Waters decks from Mercadian Masques block back in '99. Before that it was my beloved 5CG and at THAT I never saw the exact same copy anywhere before or since then.

Huh, well, I still consider myself a net-decker because I DO read a lot of tournament reports and Top 8 decklists (although lately I've been neglecting this habit).

Lastly, I never complain when someone else uses, what I'll call now, a "Xerox" copied deck from the internet. It's pointless to do so. People will information as they see fit and what's the harm in that? If I get beat all the time with it, then I'll just have to get better playing skills and/or a better deck.

I do feel a little better now that I know what some other opinions are about what is a net deck.

~Mark O.

 

[Reverend Love]

I for one have a problem with people who bring netdecks into a casual players setting. I'm one of those guys who expects to see netdecks in great abundance during tournaments, but would rather leave them there. While fiddling with my pet creations I'm not exactly keen on having a tried and true life eating monster distilled and perfected by someone other then my opponent, sitting opposite me at the kitchen table. I see casual play as a bastion of Johnny’ism, where I can take some crap rares, and make a fun deck to play. I don't take my pet projects to tournaments, so why do they have to bring their netdecks to my science fair?

There's a time and place for everything, and netdecks in a casual setting is no-no at my group's kitchen tables.

 

[Oversoul]

Well, it seems by "netdecks" there you actually mean good decks, since it's not originality that's the issue at hand, but the fact that your opponent is using a tried and true killer you both know the intricacies of and not giving you time to explore you new creation...

 

[Reverend Love]

No, I mean what I say. If someone rips my face off 3rd turn with some whacky creation then I'm cool with it. After all they took the time to find the card combination, test it, and tune it. They deserve to reap the rewards of their labor. I'm not asking for a free ride, to sit back and "hide it the weeds" so that my little pile of goober cards can win with a Gray Ogre and Firebreathing. What my group prefers to discover our own good decks, and to leave prebuilt killers at the doorstep.

It's also an opportunity to discover some true magic card gems. I enjoy discovering quirky cards that otherwise wouldn't see the time of day if all I did was netdeck.

EDIT

Sorry Oversoul. I can see how my prior post reads that way. Please insert tried and true life eating machine.

EDIT

The more I think about it, the more obvious it becomes to me that Magic is a personnel experience. For some people enjoyment is found within the game alone. The deck building aspect is merely an obstacle to the game. While others exclusively enjoy deck tinkering. I personally enjoy both.

I can understand how using netdecks would be a boon to some who either lack the time needed to create an excellent deck, or simply the know how. After all making a good deck isn't easy, and requires a rather large time investment.

However I do believe that if you netdeck exclusively, only slightly modifying someone else’s build, your undermining your magic skills.

 

[Spiderman]

How much of the "netdeck" would you consider not playing against in a casual setting? A literal decklist that won a tourney? A deck that's 4 cards away? 10 cards away?

The reason I ask is because (as an example) there's some ideas like Affinity that are obviously good for casual play and someone may just have one Arcbound Ravager and wants to play with it, but doesn't have the full set of 4 to make it more consistent or perhaps not a lot of the other support cards (depending on rarity).

 

[Killer Joe]

Re-Lo : I am torn by my actions at this MP game I played the Elf Ball. I DO consider it as a 'net-deck' it just so happens that I my list and an actual list of the real one probably isn't the same. So using:
4x Pemmin's Aura
4x Wirewood Channeler
4x Flamewave Invoker

the three main cards for the deck IS net-decking, right?

I'm trying to convince myself that I didn't do anything wrong. Do I take a red/green Grizzly Bear/Shock deck next time to punish myself? How about I put a specific limit on myself and only take an all common deck (and not use any broken commons, either).

Your kitchen table has your own rules, this group I played with has specific spelled out rules that I stayed completely within the range of them. So do I/Should I ammend those rules for myself only and take sub-optimal decks? What if I take my very own creation "Erratic-Spikes" deck? These folks don't play with Spikes or Tradewind Riders, or Mystic Snake or Propaganda's. Besides that, the 'combo' of Erratic Portal with Spike Feeder or Weaver isn't exactly undiscovered. What if someone else has thought about it and posted it somewhere on the net. Am I NOW playing a net-deck? Surely SOMEONE out there has thought up of this combo before, I certainly can't be the only one on earth that has come up with it? Right?

A person in this group in fact TOLD me to keep comming with these kinds of decks because I've already started a ripple through out the group of folks wanting to revise their old decks therefore improving themselves when they've been stagnent for the last three or four years. I am indirectly helping to improve the environment of their play group. Now I know that sounds 'egocentristic' and I'm no Oscar Tan , but what I'm saying is true and not from MY mouth but from one of them.

I'm taking my own version of a R/G Fires deck next month. I HAVE no working list to copy from (nor do I want one), but I can tell you right now that I will reign HOLY TERROR on them. I may not win this time because I'm sure they'll be ready for me but I add a whole new dynamic experience for them each time I go. And I WANT them to become better players, I WANT one of them to take me to task and make me suffer for what I did. But until then I'll be brining decks that I know. I can't play a Wall of Resistence/Library of Leng combo deck becuase I have NO idea on how that works (I just named two cards that I think I saw someone playing with at that game).

[End Rant]

 

[Spiderman]

I think that if they're open to your decks and you're building within that framework, it's fine. Do your best! And do your worst on them!

 

[Oversoul]

Originally posted by Reverend Love
The more I think about it, the more obvious it becomes to me that Magic is a personnel experience. For some people enjoyment is found within the game alone. The deck building aspect is merely an obstacle to the game. While others exclusively enjoy deck tinkering. I personally enjoy both.

I can understand how using netdecks would be a boon to some who either lack the time needed to create an excellent deck, or simply the know how. After all making a good deck isn't easy, and requires a rather large time investment.

However I do believe that if you netdeck exclusively, only slightly modifying someone else’s build, your undermining your magic skills.

Agreed. While luck and, of course, playing skill/experience are integral to winning, a huge factor is what is in your deck/how well you know what is in your deck. I have used the internet as a tool to try to find ways to improve my decks in the past, and will probably continue to do so. I use multiple internet sources for this often enough, as well as my own ideas and those of other players, removing what does not work during testing and adding new things that might. I don't think any of my opponents have ever had a problem with it or called it "net-decking" except one guy who also had what might be considered a "net deck" (but then, so can most decks) and did cheat to beat me.