A note about netdeck bashing

[Archpriest]

A note about netdeck bashing

I think the high horse attitude towards people using optimal decks should stop. I confess, there was a time I used to be the same grouch. But the more I play and speak to players, the more I find the "oh, that noob uses a net deck" being nothing more than a self-esteem boost.

For example, yesterday I made one Axemen deck (have a witness ). Today I saw swim using almost the exact one. People quite often come up with similar builds independently. There are reasons for that: game structure and efficiency. In fact, even if you build all of your decks and are a competent player, sooner or later, those decks will resemble the ones the majority uses. In the long run, the reasons I mentioned will prevail over personal preferences. I mean, I tend to use my own decks but if I see a new card used by another player in a similar deck, and that card seems to perform more efficiently than mine, it would be foolish not to try it out.

I have to say though that I was still a little disappointed that Axemen will gain popularity now. Can't surprise people anymore with it. Oh, well... on to the Monsters.

:cheers3:

 

[Ouderkirkj]

Do you ever stop posting?

 

[rock8790]

For example, yesterday I made one Axemen deck (have a witness ). Today I saw swim using almost the exact one. People quite often come up with similar builds independently. There are reasons for that: game structure and efficiency. In fact, even if you build all of your decks and are a competent player, sooner or later, those decks will resemble the ones the majority uses.

I had the same experience last patch with Henselt Reavers, I thought I had come up with a brilliant original idea then saw a card-for-card replica on gwentdb. The most efficient decks will always rise to the top, and the internet isn't going anywhere so they will be shared.

I think this tends to come up more when there is a netdeck that is exploiting an imbalance in the game, which may be happening after this last patch.

 

[Archpriest]

Do you ever stop posting?

I had the same experience last patch with Henselt Reavers, I thought I had come up with a brilliant original idea then saw a card-for-card replica on gwentdb. The most efficient decks will always rise to the top, and the internet isn't going anywhere so they will be shared.

I think this tends to come up more when there is a netdeck that is exploiting an imbalance in the game, which may be happening after this last patch.

I don't think that using an imbalanced deck makes the case different, tbh. There are always those after every patch.
Overall, if someone plays ranked and winning isn't in the equation, there's something wrong with that.

 

[Karajorma]

Yeah, I've been saying much the same for a while after I noticed that my Monsters deck looked a lot like Lifecoach's one (Like 2-3 cards different).

 

[Guest 4021160]

I agree, but lets think progressivelly. How do you stop it? I have an idea, if you will. Create a post how to beat the X netdeck. It will raise awarness. Share experience. Do you think it's doable?

 

[partci]

@Karolis.petrikas I have a better idea - stop the internet.

 

[fostdecile]

I have a way better idea. Implement faction banning on Ranked Matchmaking. I have recently fought with a few unmasked Imlerith and Witcher 2 Dandelion, its pretty obvious that they got there last season because of Dagon because they play like poop this season.

 

[Guest 4021160]

I have a way better idea. Implement faction banning on Ranked Matchmaking. I have recently fought with a few unmasked Imlerith and Witcher 2 Dandelion, its pretty obvious that they got there last season because of Dagon because they play like poop this season.

This was raised before in here and many other occasions.

 

[Archpriest]

I agree, but lets think progressivelly. How do you stop it? I have an idea, if you will. Create a post how to beat the X netdeck. It will raise awarness. Share experience. Do you think it's doable?

If I create a deck that beats a net deck, I'm creating another net deck.

I have a way better idea. Implement faction banning on Ranked Matchmaking. I have recently fought with a few unmasked Imlerith and Witcher 2 Dandelion, its pretty obvious that they got there last season because of Dagon because they play like poop this season.

Horrible, horrible idea imo. You will then create not the optimal deck but something that allows you to disregard a specific faction. Wanna be a good player, adjust and play against all of them or don't play at all. Tournaments have different structure than ranked play.

 

[Karajorma]

I don't have a problem with being able to ban a specific leader, as long as you get less ranking points for each leader you ban. Suppose your deck is weak against weather, you'd say that don't want to play Dagon and in return only get half the points for every match you won. Which means it's only worth doing if there is 1 specific deck that counters yours and it comes up more than half of the time.

It would be very good for stopping the situation that the game is in now (cause spell ST would quickly find themselves only facing other spell ST decks) while everyone else would still get to enjoy ranked.

 

[zecenker]

HenryGrosmont

 

[Rawls]

People quite often come up with similar builds independently.

Yeah when factions have only a handful of variations that are optimal competitively whatever you build for ranked is going to look like some version of a netdeck somewhere because you'll get there just by tinkering to make it better, even if you build it on your own. I've never watched a Gwent streamer video ... but always end up with something resembling one of the Eithne control decks of the season. I like playing Eithne control. I like winning. So I tinker with it till I win more. It normally looks like some kind of netdeck.

 

[RickMelethron]

the more I find the "oh, that noob uses a net deck" being nothing more than a self-esteem boost.

i never understood people who say that... if the other guy is a noob, and they lose to him, what does that make them?

 

[Stormbuster]

Netdecking is nothing else but by-passing the author's learning and error making process. Some will say is smart to do it as it is a time saver, others will say anyone doing it is dumb enough not to be able to create his own deck.

I personally prefer to make my own decks, because this is a part of the fun...to try making the best possible deck. For me there is no fun to click my mouse based on someone else's workout; I would personally feel something like I am cheating to myself.

What is clear is that anyone can note a lot of noobs using netdecks; while they didn't pass thru learning process, they cannot control them well enough.

 

[ArianeGrosmont]

Too true. Even if you somehow do come up with something that no one else has thought of yet, if it's any good, people start copying it, and voila- it's no longer only yours,..

The complete other side of the coin:
whenever a big change in the game happens, my favorite thing to do is build new decks. And I always build like 4-5 SC decks, cuz I love them and they always have so many different types of archetype (Of course, none of these decks have ever seen ranked play).
...and yet, this time I haven't built a single SC deck so far. Why? Not because they're not interesting or not fun, simply because there are SC decks out there that are considered 'cheap netdecks'...

So basically in my condescending attitude of 'i won't let netdeckers dictate the way I play gwent' I ended up letting netdecks dictate what I do or don't play.

So I've decided to go build a SC spell deck, and play it, and tweak it, and enjoy it, and not give a fuck if my opponent thinks I copied it off the internet.. hell, it'll probably work to my advantage: those few cards that'll be a little different will catch them off guard!

 

[fostdecile]

If I create a deck that beats a net deck, I'm creating another net deck.

Horrible, horrible idea imo. You will then create not the optimal deck but something that allows you to disregard a specific faction. Wanna be a good player, adjust and play against all of them or don't play at all. Tournaments have different structure than ranked play.

I don't think it's a bad idea at all. It encourages versatility and actually proves that the player is a good player, not only being able to reach high ranks with one specific type of deck/faction. Versatile player who can adapt to different decks and still play well deserves better respect IMO.

 

[Archpriest]

I don't think it's a bad idea at all. It encourages versatility and actually proves that the player is a good player, not only being able to reach high ranks with one specific type of deck/faction. Versatile player who can adapt to different decks and still play well deserves better respect IMO.

There's a pro ladder for that, I assume...

 

[fostdecile]

There's a pro ladder for that, I assume...

The pro ladders' feature should have been on the normal MMR. A "Pro" who only uses one deck to reach to the top? Really? pffft.

 

[ArianeGrosmont]

I don't have a problem with being able to ban a specific leader, as long as you get less ranking points for each leader you ban. Suppose your deck is weak against weather, you'd say that don't want to play Dagon and in return only get half the points for every match you won. Which means it's only worth doing if there is 1 specific deck that counters yours and it comes up more than half of the time.

It would be very good for stopping the situation that the game is in now (cause spell ST would quickly find themselves only facing other spell ST decks) while everyone else would still get to enjoy ranked.

Here's an idea: play the single player challenges: you can pick which deck you play against. Enjoy

Oh, you want to sit at the grown-ups' table? Then you either have to be ready for certain decks, or be ready to lose.