Netdecking Discussion [Why is everyone doing it?]

[Strollin]

Originally posted by Strollin View Post Statements like this dont really help the discussion tbh... like this one?
Originally posted by Dark_Spect3r View Post Ok i can understand people are lazy, but this is more about being dumb than something else. How come no one can think for themselves anymore? This game is still in Beta and already saw a link on other thread, to a site with lists of ready to go decks!!! Why the hell would anyone play a game if is not to have fun and think for themselves?

Just because someone else doesnt contribute to the discussion that much it doesnt mean you have to do the same.
Besides the other guy at least adressed the issue there while you just advised OP to deal with it.

 

[nukedawhales]

The problem are unbalanced cards.
Right now there are many cards which are just not as good as the others or even more important does not fit any strong strategies/ synergies.

Balance, Gwent really needs balance. Between cards and (very important) between strategies/ cards synergies. That'll brings diversity to the meta.

you cant balance a card game. there will always be "the best deck", which has a x% higher winrate and is therefore played by a majority of the ppl. since there will always be a gwentdb, even with new cards / nerfs everybody will just switch the deck in hours. so nerfing might be the solution in some cases but it doesnt solve the problem in general.
as i already wrote above, cd project has to make it attrative for ppl to play different decks by rewarding them for not playing the meta crap, or "forcing" ppl to play a variety of decks.

For me point of Gwent game is winning. So I had no idea why should I play some bad deck with crappy combos and terrible winrate when I could play good deck with OP combos and much better winrate.

usually the point of any game is having fun (or socializing .. which doesnt seem to be possible in gwent atm), not winning. to me (and to the op i think) it doesnt sound enjoyable to play the same deck for hours every day for several weeks over and over again to earn ore/scraps or climb the ladder. and facing the same deck over and over again isnt fun too.

 

[zhiphius]

Wouldnt say "everyone", once in a while i see unique decks.
I also make my own decks and have not to this date netdecked.

Looking forward to reset myself, wonder how many will buy their collection up.

 

[Mivo]

as i already wrote above, cd project has to make it attrative for ppl to play different decks by rewarding them for not playing the meta crap, or "forcing" ppl to play a variety of decks.

"Forcing" people to play something they don't want to play is not a good idea. People will always take the shortest route available to whatever it is that they want. If you provide "incentives" to play something other than the most common deck (which changes all the time), people will consider the benefits of doing that vs. the benefits of playing the strongest deck (e.g, higher win rate vs. getting 10% extra XP). Or they'll exploit the system (which would necessarily need to be automated) by making just enough changes to get the bonus. If you base it on faction, then there will be a top deck for every faction that people fall back on. I think adapting is the best solution. If enough people play the same deck, someone will come with a counter. Yes, it means that you probably can't always play exactly what you want to play (if a good win rate is what you want), but that's the nature of a ranked, competitive setting: you're not playing alone.

usually the point of any game is having fun (or socializing .. which doesnt seem to be possible in gwent atm), not winning. to me (and to the op i think) it doesnt sound enjoyable to play the same deck for hours every day for several weeks over and over again to earn ore/scraps or climb the ladder. and facing the same deck over and over again isnt fun too.

To me, winning and having fun aren't mutually exclusive. If I get killed over and over in a single player game and make no progress, I'm not having fun, either. I'd wager that to most people who play in a competitive mode winning is a large part of what makes the activity fun. Plus, everybody has their own definition of what's fun. The game does support both a casual mode and a ranked mode. In the latter, winning is more emphasized than in the former. Unlike other online CCGs, Gwent doesn't force you to play ranked mode just to get daily rewards. You can do that in casual mode, too.

If most people play net- or metadecks, that is what they want to do.

 

[prostynick]

Casual mode is probably a better place for experimentation

I like experimenting in ranked. In casual there's much more custom decks, because people experiment, so you invent a deck, go there and you feel deck's good, because you were winning and then you go to ranked and get destroyed. I prefer to be destroyed instantly, so I know the deck sucks against the current meta. If you have a decent deck you'll get back to your rating in no time anyway.

 

[slow_cheeetah]

you cant balance a card game. there will always be "the best deck", which has a x% higher winrate and is therefore played by a majority of the ppl.

Nice, so unbalanced game is a good thing right now?
The problem is that with some of cards you can build a good deck and some cards don't fit any build.
Is it any reason to keep the situation when couple of cards have very good combos and many others don't?

 

[nukedawhales]

Nice, so unbalanced game is a good thing right now?
The problem is that with some of cards you can build a good deck and some cards don't fit any build.
Is it any reason to keep the situation when couple of cards have very good combos and many others don't?

i didnt say its "good". its the reality.
therefore (again) cd project has to find a way to encourage ppl to play a variety of decks/cards.

 

[Calrael]

Complaining about other people playing the same decks is about as productive as watching paint dry. If you find yourself encountering the same decks over and over, craft something that beats those decks. If you can consistently do so, people will catch on and THEN you will get a diversification of the meta. Or if people don't catch on, you'll become the top ranked player, not a bad outcome either. This is true for pretty much any CCG ever.

 

[nukedawhales]

"Forcing" people to play something they don't want to play is not a good idea. People will always take the shortest route available to whatever it is that they want. If you provide "incentives" to play something other than the most common deck (which changes all the time), people will consider the benefits of doing that vs. the benefits of playing the strongest deck (e.g, higher win rate vs. getting 10% extra XP). Or they'll exploit the system (which would necessarily need to be automated) by making just enough changes to get the bonus. If you base it on faction, then there will be a top deck for every faction that people fall back on. I think adapting is the best solution. If enough people play the same deck, someone will come with a counter. Yes, it means that you probably can't always play exactly what you want to play (if a good win rate is what you want), but that's the nature of a ranked, competitive setting: you're not playing alone.

"forcing" to me is exactely what you discribe as "providing incentives". e.g. you have to play a different class for every tier of the dailies, or less xp for commonly used cards etc.
its not about what i want to play. what is the "endgame" of gwent for you? if it stays like it is right now, everybody will play the same deck over (lets say monster) over and over again until cards get nerfed or new cards get introduced. doesnt that sound boring? "providing incentives" would lead to ppl playing several different decks. so (lets say) a nilfgaard deck which is good against monsters... but wait.. there is an elf deck, which i good against nilfgaard etc etc. the meta would get "wider".
and there isnt "a strongest deck for every faction", because wether a deck is strong or not depends on the meta. since monster seems to be the meta atm, you can only play monster.. or counter monster.
it should be in the best interest of cd project to "widen" the meta. because otherwise all i need is the topdeck (25 cards). after aquiring them i dont care about the other 300 cards. so i wont spend money on them ... which would be the early end of the game...

To me, winning and having fun aren't mutually exclusive. If I get killed over and over in a single player game and make no progress, I'm not having fun, either. I'd wager that to most people who play in a competitive mode winning is a large part of what makes the activity fun. Plus, everybody has their own definition of what's fun. The game does support both a casual mode and a ranked mode. In the latter, winning is more emphasized than in the former. Unlike other online CCGs, Gwent doesn't force you to play ranked mode just to get daily rewards. You can do that in casual mode, too.

If most people play net- or metadecks, that is what they want to do.

i never said that winning and having fun are mutual exclusive. what im saying is that facing the same deck over and over again isnt fun, i still had a 50%+ winrate on ranked but playing against the same deck over and over again is boring and not fun.

 

[Dark_Spect3r]

and the way you play affects them. what if they want to play against weather monsters and radovid control, but queue into someone playing whatever you play?

Then they have their will done because monsters is what most people play

you don't get to complain about how other people play the game, the same way they don't get to complain about how you play. if you dislike that, feel free to find a single-player game...

[/quote]

Of course i get to complain.
You may agree or not agree with me and then we have a healthy discussion about it like we are doing now. After all, this is a forum to debate things, right?
As long as i am respectful i can complain and disagree with whatever i want, same as you.

Besides seems to me that i am not the only one feeling this way.

 

[Mivo]

"forcing" to me is exactely what you discribe as "providing incentives". e.g. you have to play a different class for every tier of the dailies, or less xp for commonly used cards etc. its not about what i want to play. what is the "endgame" of gwent for you? if it stays like it is right now, everybody will play the same deck over (lets say monster) over and over again until cards get nerfed or new cards get introduced. doesnt that sound boring?

If you require different factions for dailies, then people play the top deck for every faction, and if they don't have the cards for that deck, they'll not enjoy the experience (that is why I stopped playing Hearthstone when I tried it out about half a year after its release). Newer people won't have multiple competitive decks. This is why I said I feel that forcing people to do something they don't want to do isn't a good design approach. Everybody isn't playing the same identical deck right now, either. There are a number of competitive decks available. Yes, they often contain overlapping cards, but there really is variety.

At low levels when people have fewer cards to choose from, and can't craft the expensive ones, there is less variety, I think, though it's off set by people being more willing to experiment or having to make do with what they have. Monsters are popular at the moment (and newly so) because you can make a strong deck cheaply. Then again, I'm not sure that it's actually a hard fact that less variety is a given, and that it's not a result of a lack of people who make videos about decks that are in between beginner and high-end decks.

For me personally, the end game of Gwent is to collect end game cards, which has nothing to do with being competitive. I have no ambitions to become a top-100 player because I don't have the competitive zeal or skill required for that.

i never said that winning and having fun are mutual exclusive. what im saying is that facing the same deck over and over again isnt fun, i still had a 50%+ winrate on ranked but playing against the same deck over and over again is boring and not fun.

The post byCalrael answers this well, I feel, unless it's not enjoyable for you to over and over beat the same deck that you face by playing a counter deck. To a degree (not entirely), I feel that this is largely a matter of having the choice between being part of the (perceived, not necessarily actual) problem or part of a potential solution.

 

[nukedawhales]

If you require different factions for dailies, then people play the top deck for every faction, and if they don't have the cards for that deck, they'll not enjoy the experience (that is why I stopped playing Hearthstone when I tried it out about half a year after its release). Newer people won't have multiple competitive decks. This is why I said I feel that forcing people to do something they don't want to do isn't a good design approach. Everybody isn't playing the same identical deck right now, either. There are a number of competitive decks available. Yes, they often contain overlapping cards, but there really is variety.

At low levels when people have fewer cards to choose from, and can't craft the expensive ones, there is less variety, I think, though it's off set by people being more willing to experiment or having to make do with what they have. Monsters are popular at the moment (and newly so) because you can make a strong deck cheaply. Then again, I'm not sure that it's actually a hard fact that less variety is a given, and that it's not a result of a lack of people who make videos about decks that are in between beginner and high-end decks.

For me personally, the end game of Gwent is to collect end game cards, which has nothing to do with being competitive. I have no ambitions to become a top-100 player because I don't have the competitive zeal or skill required for that.



The post byCalrael answers this well, I feel, unless it's not enjoyable for you to over and over beat the same deck that you face by playing a counter deck. To a degree (not entirely), I feel that this is largely a matter of having the choice between being part of the (perceived, not necessarily actual) problem or part of a potential solution.

Im lvl 23 atm (i think) and im facing lvl 30+ players. And they still play mostly monsters. so its not true that this deck is popular just because its cheap.
I disagree with Calreal. If i would be able to find a deck to counter monsters effectively, i would just create a new netdeck, which would be played by everyone etc etc. that is not a solution.

 

[alexmanelistu]

I played this game with northern realms because are my fav. Why everyone is net decking? i thought this game is fun to play. i made a deck myself and i barrely can pass frm mosnters with the same decks, i think it becomes boring after few games. You are not bored to play only one deck and no fun? i am rank 3 but is hard to rank up because everyone has the perfect deck, and no fun at all.

 

[Nimraphel]

I played this game with northern realms because are my fav. Why everyone is net decking? i thought this game is fun to play. i made a deck myself and i barrely can pass frm mosnters with the same decks, i think it becomes boring after few games. You are not bored to play only one deck and no fun? i am rank 3 but is hard to rank up because everyone has the perfect deck, and no fun at all.

People don't have the perfect deck at rank 3. You're paired against people with similar MMR to you. However, weather monsters remain one of the cheapest efficient decks, therefore a lot of people use it. I highly doubt you're running into a fully competitive rank 15 weather deck when you're rank 3

That being said, weather can be countered relatively easily, depending on which faction you play. Which leader do you use for Northern Realms? What is your strategy? Do you include Dimetirium Bomb/3x First Light? Promote to protect against weather? All are easily obtained even at low rank.

 

[alexmanelistu]

Hey nimraphel i use foltest but i want t craft henselt , i use scorch, 3 clear weather , one dimiterium bomb. i have gold yennefer which deals one damage to the stronghest non gold unit, triss which increase in my hand with 4 strength, regis, odrin, 3x temerian foot soldiers with odrin Works also i use reinforcement for temerian cavalry (8 strength) and with swallow , then i duplicate with foltest. this is in main my strategi, i play for fun but i am angry because everyone plays the same decks.
Also i use trololo to gain an advantage from scoiata el which buffs very much units in one row. Also i have shani to ressurect odrin or trololo in case.

 

[Cagey75]

I'm just at rank 7, not playing long, and already finding it's nothing but same ol' Monster net decks with Skellige in between, over and over. It gets boring fast, it's not enticing me to want to play more to rank up. I'm still enjoying the game, but after playing Vs 10 monsters in a row, I exit out for a while and look for something else to amuse me. I haven't looked at one decklist outside my own yet. I have gotten ideas from watching streams and YT vids, but for me part of the fun of a TCG is the creativity, making up your own weird combinations. I don't get why anyone would want to play one for hours on end with someone else's decks. But ... alas, it'll happen in every single TCG ever made.

 

[Rodick]

I think this game will be great again when more expansions hit, but first it needs to hit launching. Try to help devs with problems that they should solve, or with some cool ideas what to do, so we exit beta phase fast and get more cards. More cards, more decks, more fun.. wohooo

 

[alexmanelistu]

I'm just at rank 7, not playing long, and already finding it's nothing but same ol' Monster net decks with Skellige in between, over and over. It gets boring fast, it's not enticing me to want to play more to rank up. I'm still enjoying the game, but after playing Vs 10 monsters in a row, I exit out for a while and look for something else to amuse me. I haven't looked at one decklist outside my own yet. I have gotten ideas from watching streams and YT vids, but for me part of the fun of a TCG is the creativity, making up your own weird combinations. I don't get why anyone would want to play one for hours on end with someone else's decks. But ... alas, it'll happen in every single TCG ever made.

I really feel the same. i played this game for witcher series. and i really wished to be different than hearthstone, if you played hearthstone you know that everyone is net decking.
Also this game is better that hearthstone, were games which made me to think twice and in the end fill with satisfaction, but were few games.

 

[Nimraphel]

Hey nimraphel i use foltest but i want t craft henselt , i use scorch, 3 clear weather , one dimiterium bomb. i have gold yennefer which deals one damage to the stronghest non gold unit, triss which increase in my hand with 4 strength, regis, odrin, 3x temerian foot soldiers with odrin Works also i use reinforcement for temerian cavalry (8 strength) and with swallow , then i duplicate with foltest. this is in main my strategi, i play for fun but i am angry because everyone plays the same decks.
Also i use trololo to gain an advantage from scoiata el which buffs very much units in one row. Also i have shani to ressurect odrin or trololo in case.

Alright - you already have quite some cards for level (or rank?) 3. Henselt is definitely better simply because Foltest is... well, useless. Radovid is great as well. Anything but Foltest.

I would ditch Odrin. He is simply too little value for too much effort. For any Northern Realms player, getting Priscilla and Nenneke is essential! Those cards are ridiculously good, and resurrecting Priscilla with Nenneke/Shani can provide immense tempo and value.

You lack deck thinning furthermore. It is more important to thin your deck than making a ginormous 16 point cavalry for duplicating - since more often than not, they will eat a Geralt: Igni, Scorch, or weather. Reaver Hunters/Reaver Scouts can thin your deck. Kaedweni Siege Support is amazing - even in a row under weather, he provides 7 value. Swapping the Cavalry out for Ballista also makes you ignore the melee row - and actually allows you to tech Biting Frost into the deck, if you face a lot of Consume Monsters/Dwarf melee stacking. Obviously it's useless vs. weather monsters, but it can be powerful against a lot of other match-ups. And Ballistas can finish off key targets under weather.

Hope it helped NR can be powerful, but I would recommend incorporating ways to establish card advantage. Ciri (+ Roach) and Prince Stennis are widely used - and powerful Card Advantage generators.

 

[Nimraphel]

And on a general note... I don't feel like a lot of people are netdecking. I see a lot of similar archetypes, true, but at least at high ranks there is quite a bit of diversity in terms of key cards (except for consume monsters, but that is mostly due to Arachas Behemoths requiring too much setup and detracting from the deck's rhythm and control). I would encourage people to draw inspiration from decks found online; it can be both inspiring and teach a lot about the game and people's thought processes - and hopefully inspire to further creativity.