What is a casual aggro deck?

  • Thread starter TheCasualOblivion
  • Start date

Oversoul

The Tentacled One
TheCasualOblivion said:
I talk a good game, but we have a tournament jerk who lurks around, and he's thrown around a tournament grade U/G madness and a pretty good extended Goblin/Burn at us. My best decks are a turn slower, him killing me the turn before I kill him. The difference is people don't refuse to play me.
Sounds more to me like the difference is him building better decks. I'm not usually cut-throat myself, when it comes to casual play, but I'm not about to fault anyone simply for winning...
 
T

TheCasualOblivion

Guest
1. I've looked at tournament decklists. His are 1-2 cards off max. Other people who know him better have seen him play in tournaments with those same decks. He tries to convince us to net deck and join him in building U/G Madness decks. I'll give him some credit though, he may net-deck and admit it, but he does know how to play.

2. Nobody plays him. We all agree he isn't any fun to play and shun him.

3. He's a jerk. He plays with pink sleeves, because he says "Magic is Gay"

4. I wasn't being bitter about anything. I've been playing against tournament decks for as long as I've been playing. I rarely win, and I don't expect to either. I don't build to beat tournament decks, I build to play a fun game, while also trying to build to win. I take pride in building a deck or two that can play a decent and fun game against anyone, and can run 1 turn behind him.
 

Ferret

Moderator
Staff member
I've always been an "aggro" player - although, at one time I was called a "beatdown" player, a "tribal" player, and of course, I've been called a "creature" player.

You know something? I hate these terms - of course, I hate any term that is used heavily in the tourney scene. It tends to "dumb down" the environment. When I build a deck I don't care what name you're going to call it. Just play against it and have fun.

The most succesful deck I've ever made I already posted. It was pure Green. It used Elves to get out big Wurms and it won - even in multiplayer. The only way to beat it was to gang up on it. If played right they can be deadly. Here's the weird part. The players in the group loved that deck. They all started building decks just to beat it. Of course, then I had to tweak it to beat their decks. And every new expansion allowed me to let the deck evolve to a new 'generation'.

Of course, there's more than just throwing a bunch of critters together in a deck that have the same creature type. The deck has to have cards that help your creatures hurt more and of course, sometimes you actually have to have some kind of defense in the deck (I'm still not sure why.)

Still, building decks should be about having fun w/ them and trying to win. It shouldn't be about what labels fit them better.

-Ferret

"Don't hate me because I'm a winner - there's lots of other reasons to hate me :)"
 

Spiderman

Administrator
Staff member
Ferret said:
You know something? I hate these terms - of course, I hate any term that is used heavily in the tourney scene. It tends to "dumb down" the environment. When I build a deck I don't care what name you're going to call it. Just play against it and have fun.

Still, building decks should be about having fun w/ them and trying to win. It shouldn't be about what labels fit them better.
The problem is that decks pretty much fall under certain categories where they can be labeled. You just can't get around it. It's like when people learned about the mana curve or the principle of drawing cards - it is (or was) all part of the maturing of Magic and theory and deckbuilding and so on.
 
Top