Let me reword your statement into different context and you will see how twisted logic you use.
"I can't fathom how people are still trying to complain about murdering. As if there is some way to magically eliminate it from the life."
"For crying out loud if the internet didn't exist people would STILL do it. It's not hard at all to watch other murderers and simply do same deeds like them."
This was just example to display how irrational your argumentation is and now I will try to make argumentation for better explanation.
1) If there is something fundamentally wrong, it is good to not follow bad example, but instead do, what you consider to be proper action, what is expressing you instead of mimicking somebody else, because you lack resources, will, courage, suitable environment ... etc.
2) It is only you, who is there crying out loud. I was just answering question presented by original poster and tried to explain my reason. It is you, who came here started crying out loud how do I dare to say anything about netdecking. If I would want to do some complaining against netdecking, I would not post it as answer to others post. I would create my own topic.
3) You are simply suggesting, that if somebody sees something bad happening, he should not fight it, he should join it and do the same, which is really immoral suggestion from you.
What is fundamentally bad about netdecking? Or rather, what decklist is fundamentally bad to you right now?
And how on earth does it stand to compare with murder in the example that you used? A little heavy handed no?
This is a game, your life doesn't depend on it.
You're really trying to make a comparison between murder and a collectible card game? That doesn't work at all but I'll respond anyway. Murder is illegal for obvious reasons. You can't have people killing each other in a civil society. Doesn't matter if they are still going to do it or not there has to be laws against it and when someone does murder someone else they are caught and punished for it. This system works as it helps to prevent murders and takes people who do it out of society.
This is a digital card game. CDPR literally can not make it against the rules (illegal) to copy someone else's deck. First off they would never know who is copying what deck and then if they suspected it what would they do? Stop people from doing the deck or start banning people who use it? Hopefully you see the issues with that. CDPR can't enforce that rule even if they wanted to make it. They have no reason to make that rule either as using any combination of cards should be allowed. They put the cards into the game themselves to be used. Doesn't matter if you don't like it or not.
What I said was perfectly rational. Your argument comparing net-decking to murder is not rational.
You're taking this video game a bit too seriously with that wording. Peope play it to have fun and people have fun in different ways. Some people can play it for 10 hours a day and they have the means to build decks themselves, decks that are very strong. Other people can only play for a short period each day and just don't have the time or means to make their own decks to enjoy the gameplay. There isn't anything fundamentally wrong with learning from another player. It will happen whether it's card for card in a youtube video or by just observing your opponent. What would be your solution to stopping people from doing this?
That is not what I was suggesting.
There is a very clear difference between something that is morally wrong (murder) and enjoying a video game. Learning good cards or good decks from other players is not morally wrong.
Edit: If you go back and look I did not complain about net decking to you. You brought it up to me. I was pointing out to you that anyone who cares about winning is going to be using the unicorn cards because they are so powerful.
Last edited:
Honestly I can't think of a single deck in the current meta that I don't want to GG.
Woodland is annoying and a bit lame considering it's the closest to what you could call "point vomit" deck but still. I don't think it's to an unreasonable extend, yes it's an OP deck and Woodland is easily the best leader in the game atm (which would seriously need a nerf) but we've seen worst and I wouldn't call this deck "cancer" per say.
In fact I give much more GG than I used to (because yes, old Dwarves resilience shenanigans, Mill, Sabbath...no GG from me even though I almost never lost to them because my decks were always heavily armed against them, it's just a matter of principles).
Now it's more a matter of behaviour, if my opponent is trying to be mean, annoying, disrespectful or a mix of all three I don't GG. I also don't give GG if my opponent made a huge misplay because it's kinda rewarding a very bad play and I just can't do that unless my opponent is a beginner (because let's be honest here, everyone scorched his own unit at one point of his/her life, for example, it's how you learn the game).
Woodland is annoying and a bit lame considering it's the closest to what you could call "point vomit" deck but still. I don't think it's to an unreasonable extend, yes it's an OP deck and Woodland is easily the best leader in the game atm (which would seriously need a nerf) but we've seen worst and I wouldn't call this deck "cancer" per say.
In fact I give much more GG than I used to (because yes, old Dwarves resilience shenanigans, Mill, Sabbath...no GG from me even though I almost never lost to them because my decks were always heavily armed against them, it's just a matter of principles).
Now it's more a matter of behaviour, if my opponent is trying to be mean, annoying, disrespectful or a mix of all three I don't GG. I also don't give GG if my opponent made a huge misplay because it's kinda rewarding a very bad play and I just can't do that unless my opponent is a beginner (because let's be honest here, everyone scorched his own unit at one point of his/her life, for example, it's how you learn the game).
Don't hate the player... hate the game?
If people play Gwent from a competitive standpoint, they will play Uni/Chiro, they will play Big Woodland, they will play Commander's Horn.
I always send a GG. You shouldn't be bitter about somebody using the tools available in the game to be as competitive as possible.
I don't hate the player nor the game. I hate the cards themselves. I don't personally use the Unicorn/Chironex combo in ANY of my decks because I think it's absolutely ridiculous. I've never liked to use anything that's "OP" in Gwent. Woodland and Commander's Horn are just annoying, but like I wrote, I've made decks to counter cards like those.
I get that the cards are supposed to be used together (unicorns, duh) but you don't HAVE TO and that's my problem. Literally everyone uses them.
This is a fallacy filled burrito. You only missed making the Nazi comparison to be the most cliched way to wrongly argue about anything with anybody.
You changed 0 minds.
GG
Not at all. If you read it like that, you misunderstood it. I was only using your false construction and used it in different context, to show, that your false construction is really false. There could be almost anything replacing word "murder", point is not about murder, point is, that if somebody does something and it is easy for you to do it too, it does not mean it is good thing to do. there was no intention to make focus on "murder", there was intention to point out how your argument construction is against logic.
Why do you mention netdecking being against rules? It is only you, who is connecting netdecking with illegal actions. Of course, making netdecking illegal is nonsense and I think we both agree on that.
That is a lie. I was not comparing netdecking to murder at all and I cleared it above. I was rejecting construction of your statement in https://forums.cdprojektred.com/index.php?posts/11355511/
This is going into off-topic. This is leading to exchange of arguments why netdecking is bad/good and that is not question of original poster at all. I only wrote answer to original poster and explained why. If you want to have discussion why is netdecking bad/good, I would suggest to create different topic for it.
I reapeat it again. I was not comparing netdecking to murder, there could have been almost any other word instead of word "murder". I was pointing out, how logical construction of your argument is invalid.
Post automatically merged:
Yes, your post is attempt in manipulation. Calling "Nazi" to help into discussion is typical depserate attempt to replace missing arguments. Why can not you just make argumentation without stearing discussion into emotional direction? Is really word "Nazi" the first thing that comes to your mind, when somebody presents opinion, which you disagree with?
Time to put an end to that particular argument. No more Nazi or murder comparisons, please. Or take it to PM.
Ah I forgot, I also never ever GG peoples bringing pure net deck tiers one meta decks on casual.
Like seriously, if someone don't have the balls to show up on ranked with those deck they're a lost cause.
Casual should be the format where peoples experiment new decks and try to see something else than what you see on the ladder over and over again, playing tiers 1 decks in this format is disrespectful for your opponents (in my opinion).
Like seriously, if someone don't have the balls to show up on ranked with those deck they're a lost cause.
Casual should be the format where peoples experiment new decks and try to see something else than what you see on the ladder over and over again, playing tiers 1 decks in this format is disrespectful for your opponents (in my opinion).
Say thanks to CDPR for badly designing ranked and daily rewards system (and no way to do dailies in arena).
After reaching their ceiling in ranked, people will turn to casual to earn daily rewards. And what's the fastest way to do that? Playing a top tier deck!
Errrrr no.
I'm sorry but whoever has to play a tiers 1 deck to win games on casual should seriously question their skill on this game. As I said, this format is the playground of deck builders who're trying exotic decks and stuffs. Some of them are cool and strong but a lot are also poorly made and/or not even working properly.
I'm not critisizing those who're making none functional decks, in fact I respect them fully, at least they're not following the herd by netdecking everything they play but you obviously face some weird stuffs that are purely experimental and just cannot realisticaly win against a decent player.
It's extremely easy to win games even with a homemade deck as long as you know what you're doing. In fact, if you play well you can even beat tiers one decks very consistently (the problem of those decks not being their power but the fact that players are going on casual to see something else).
Besides, the ceiling rank issue is gonna be fix next patch.
It's not always about skill but more about time. If your goal is to simply win as many games as you can as quick as possible it's not smart to just play a random weak deck.
W
What if I am just trying that deck out? For example I am playing my homebrew metadestroyer Henselt deck, but I am not sure about weaknesses of warrior Eist or tall woodland. Therefore, I would like to try these decks and experience their suffering from my point of the view. Am I really the wrong person here?
Any deck featuring cards with names I can't pronounce. Excessive emotes, i.e one. Any deck that is better than mine. Any game I lost that I arbitrarily decide was due to some unfair reason. Feel free to insert your own in there.
Any match versus @Karolis.petrikas
Any match versus @Karolis.petrikas
