Sure. My comment isn't saying that non-standard strategies are inherently bad, just that I do not think the one that I was playing was good. My comment still applies. Your deck is based on synergy. Whether or not that synergy is strong enough to overcome the fact that you have to play inherently less powerful cards that are being played by less linear decks is not something I can possibly know without playing your deck, though if you asked me my uninformed opinion I'd say that "toe to toe" is probably a bit of an overstatement of its EV.
That's a horrible analogy Shea and you should know it, but yes you're right re: your deck and your opinions. That's fine, I'm just saying don't give UP on non-value decks because of discouragement
Fate is absurdly beautiful. 運命に弄ばれる
"Fate you keep alternating between narratives of doing it for fun and doing it for the sake of winning"
I give up on decks that I do not think can win consistently. In my opinion, this is such a deck. Therefore the only logical thing to do is stop playing it.
And its not a bad analogy. if a strategy is bad, a strategy is bad. Trying to make a bad strategy more efficient will not change that fact.
ok, so your opinion is that the way your deck is suboptimal, so you need to figure out a better strategy.
The analogy was: "I was just moving my pawns around like a retard, so the answer is not to move them around more like a retard its to learn how to play chess"
You weren't moving it randomly in the first place.... There was plenty of logic and thought behind it
Fate is absurdly beautiful. 運命に弄ばれる
"Fate you keep alternating between narratives of doing it for fun and doing it for the sake of winning"
Had some fun making a stupid deck. Recommended play environment is a big, silly multiplayer game with friends who won't mind that you just massively complicated/fucked-up the board.
I'm a hoot
Stream: twitch.tv/dramonic
-If you stick your ear close enough to the game thread you can actually hear dram suffer in real life.-Beeboy
-Being obtuse is not a consequence of being a mod, it's a prerequisite. I think you may just have overestimated my intelligence before.-Korts
I really want a fun but viable deck to play. I've been playing straight up aggro so long that I've forgotten what not turning things sideways or fun combos are even like.
No I mean a pure Mill deck. That's my wincon. I mean, I have a secondary in Consuming Aberration. And technically Undead Alchemist can win games without fully milling them out.
But yes. Mill mill mill mill mill.
Ski mask? Check! Sawed off? Check! Guilty conscience, fear of death? Check! Check! Check!
The issue with aggro from the standpoint of "is it strategically interesting" is that there is really only one decision tree: How do I maximize damage. You are never really pulled into other strategically intense areas of the game (like how do I block so that X good thing happens or how do I respond to my opponents game plan so that his cards interact with my game plan in less strategic ways.) This isn't to say that damage maximization is always easy. It's not, and there are plenty of tough choices aggro players have to make in this area, but to claim that piloting a straight up aggro deck is as strategically interesting or requires as much (or even close to the amount of) thinking that is required to play a control deck or a combo deck is just absurd.
At the point where you're making decisions on other levels of the game besides damage maximization, it means that your opponent has stabilized and you've already lost. Or, you're in an aggro-aggro mirror and you're playing the part of the control deck.
Well I disagree that it is that simple. Overextending your hand is definitely a thing. There are decks that are "all-in" where yeah, you maximize damage and if they stabilize you scoop, but there also aggro decks that require more thought and a lot of reading. Does he have enough removal to deal with my threats? Can I hold back this threat so I don't extend into a boardwipe while also putting him on a fast enough clock? Is he bluffing removal so I should play X threat or does he have it and I need a weaker threat or to wait for him to tap out?
There's definitely strategy involved.
To say it is "that mindless" is hilariously dumb. And its especially hypocritical after fighting for me with all your heart about "MAGIC ISNT A GAME WITH RNG ITS ALL SKLLLZ YO" but now you're saying there's a viable dech archetype in standard that literally involves no other skill besides playing dudes and turning them sideways in the most efficient manner possible which is unbeatable with the nuts hand? Bullshit.
Are the less decisions trees? Yeah I said that. But that doesn't make it "mindless" or less "strategically involved."
Is a Vanilla set-up of mafia less skill-based than a Complex Reck set-up?
Fate is absurdly beautiful. 運命に弄ばれる
"Fate you keep alternating between narratives of doing it for fun and doing it for the sake of winning"
Yes, because claiming a certain subset of strategies in a game is less strategically intense than other subsets of strategies is the same as talking about the amount of skill needed to play the game well....
There's a reason most bad magic players and most new players play aggressive decks. It's because they introduce the most draw based variance into the game. A bad player playing an aggro deck wins more often then a bad player playing a real deck. Go play a real deck. Get out of your comfort zone. I dare you.
I've played every single "meta" deck archetype there is while playtesting, so don't give me that shit.
The reason most new players aggressive decks is that "play dudes turn them sideways" is what is THOUGHT of as the only line of play there is, so its "simple."
There's definitely a higher skill tier than you're giving it. How the hell do top tier aggro players like Saito even exist if the archetype? He is able to consistently pilot the deck and outmanauver other "real" decks to rise above them.
Yes there's more variance, and sure its easier to win by just "playing dudes and attacking huehue free win" if you play against a slow hand.
But winning the games that ARE fair, you have to get an advantage. And getting an advantage with a deck that is "predictable" takes skill and strategy.
Fate is absurdly beautiful. 運命に弄ばれる
"Fate you keep alternating between narratives of doing it for fun and doing it for the sake of winning"
