Tired of seeing the same deck builds copied from websites

[Rogue.Eagle]

I hate playing decks other people came up with simply because it makes me feel incompetent, like I'm not smart enough to create my own good deck. Sometimes, though, there just is not a more viable option, and the deck someone else has made is the best one available when using specific cards.

For example, I tried all weekend to create a good Foltest deck, something unique I haven't really seen before. I also like to try to use cards people don't use. Most of the time Foltest is a swarm deck, and I've had success with certain variations of it in the past. However, I played tons of matches (all rank, by the way, because no risk, no reward right? ) trying to tweak my deck in a cool way and just could not get it to work. It was similar to the #1 voted Foltest deck on Gwent DB, but it didn't play those silver and gold cards, and had a few different bronze. It was losing against almost everything. My record stood at like 20-52 or something.

It's not like it wasn't optimal. The strategy worked well, but it just was never powerful enough to win a majority of games, or if I didn't draw right, I REALLY suffered.

In the end, I made a Foltest siege deck variation and now people are forfeiting to me. Most of the time, Henselt is the seige leader, but I wanted to be different. So, I came up with a pretty cool deck that is winning against almost everything, even Henselt. I'm slowly getting my record back to snuff now XD. For anyone who is wondering, the deck list is below.

Leader- King Foltest

Gold:
Geralt of Rivia
John Natalis
Dijkstra
Philippa Eilhart

Silver:
Ves
Ronvid
Foltest's Pride
Hubert Rejk
Prince Stennis
Commander's Horn

Bronze:
Kaedweni Sergeant x3
Siege Tower x3
Siege Support x2
Ballista x3
Siege Master x3
Reconnaissance

As you can see, I'm actually running Foltest's Pride, because who runs that, right? If anyone wants to know the strategy, I'd be happy to talk about it in another post.

And since we don't like using other decks, what decks have you all created? I think we should share them just to promote diversity. I'm assuming even if we play them, we won't be mad at each other because it's not like tons of people play them anyways

 

[twinkiegorilla]

simple, make arena like TESL where u have to build your own deck

I honestly wouldn't mind having a separate ranked arena which is just that. Keep the netdeck meta rank arena and create what would ostensibly be the "Casual" arena but for ranking.

 

[Philologus]

I hate playing decks other people came up with simply because it makes me feel incompetent, like I'm not smart enough to create my own good deck. Sometimes, though, there just is not a more viable option, and the deck someone else has made is the best one available when using specific cards.

For example, I tried all weekend to create a good Foltest deck, something unique I haven't really seen before. I also like to try to use cards people don't use. Most of the time Foltest is a swarm deck, and I've had success with certain variations of it in the past. However, I played tons of matches (all rank, by the way, because no risk, no reward right? ) trying to tweak my deck in a cool way and just could not get it to work. It was similar to the #1 voted Foltest deck on Gwent DB, but it didn't play those silver and gold cards, and had a few different bronze. It was losing against almost everything. My record stood at like 20-52 or something.

It's not like it wasn't optimal. The strategy worked well, but it just was never powerful enough to win a majority of games, or if I didn't draw right, I REALLY suffered.

In the end, I made a Foltest siege deck variation and now people are forfeiting to me. Most of the time, Henselt is the seige leader, but I wanted to be different. So, I came up with a pretty cool deck that is winning against almost everything, even Henselt. I'm slowly getting my record back to snuff now XD. For anyone who is wondering, the deck list is below.

Leader- King Foltest...

I love that you created your own deck. I am the same way; I don't net-deck and want to win using my own creation. (Been going poorly for me, this session)

However, I am a bit surprised that the deck you listed above is causing people to forfeit? I look at it and think how vulnerable it would be to the prevailing archetypes, especially NG alchemy (Viper Witchers and Slave Drivers)

 

[Rogue.Eagle]

I love that you created your own deck. I am the same way; I don't net-deck and want to win using my own creation. (Been going poorly for me, this session)

However, I am a bit surprised that the deck you listed above is causing people to forfeit? I look at it and think how vulnerable it would be to the prevailing archetypes, especially NG alchemy (Viper Witchers and Slave Drivers)

Well, most of the time monsters forfeit to me. Weather gets prevented from the sergeants, and swarms are pretty easily handled in mass from the ballistas. NG does pose a few problems, but I've been surprised at how well I can manage the opponent's board to get units equal to each other, across all factions. Plus, the only real problem posed for me in terms of slave driver is when they get a seige support. That is awful, but otherwise, it's not too hard to manage. I have yet to face a reveal deck, for some reason (that's all I was versing with the previous swarm deck I made). So, I'm not sure how it fairs against them.

Skellige also forfeits to me a lot, especially damage decks, because I prevent their weather and can ballista most of their units since they're all the same power.

Now, oddly enough, a problematic monster card for me is Miruna. Miruna absolutely destroys me if I cannot kill her, as I typically have to run all my units on one row, and giving 14+ points to the enemy is extremely detrimental.

A lot of my losses have been to Dwarf decks. Even hitting them hard, sometimes they get those perfect draws and their power level is insane. Most of the time, though, my losses are to variations of meta decks rather than complete copies, which I can completely respect. There's always some sort of twist and I just kind of salute them.

Overall, though, my wins have become more than my losses, so my record is slowly building back up (although recovering from such a huge deficit probably won't happen this season, >_>)

 

[hydra66]

You can't blame people for either:
- not wanting to lose every match
- trying out a top deck to see how it works

Either way gwent is a game where at lower ranks, being good with a tier 2 or 3 deck may carry you to victory over someone who plays a tier 1 deck badly.

Netdecks are present in every ccg. What do you think happens after every challenger or a mtg pro tour? The difference between games are how many different 'top decks' they can support. Diversity of meta depends on design decisions and balancing as well as the depth of the card pool. Blaming people for being sheep in a game without enough cards to make those diverse decks doesn't help

 

[fo3nixz]

ranked

I honestly wouldn't mind having a separate ranked arena which is just that. Keep the netdeck meta rank arena and create what would ostensibly be the "Casual" arena but for ranking.

i hope the new mode tomorow they gona tease is arena or draft mode, becuase if it is, netdecks death is coming soon

 

[NomanPeopled]

@Jezaboom:
Given the topic and its wording, who else would become defensive?



I don't get why people define the amount of their fun or intelligence or skill or whatever it is by denying themselves options based on popularity. I don't get why people get frustrated when they get an opportunity to try various tactics against the same archetype to improve their gameplay. I don't get why originality should determine a deck's worth in a game that is competitive by its very design. I don't get why people don't netdeck just to find out a netdeck's weaknesses.
Nor do I need to. All I need to get is that people enjoy different things. So I leave them in peace.
Doesn't seem outlandish to expect the same.



As I said before, I can sympathize with the OP, even if I don't agree. I don't see any way to change things to their satisfaction though. CDPR isn't going to penalize players playing good decks (and it's those that people are complaining about - nobody complains if you netdeck a Kambi deck).
And if they did, it would lead either to players exploiting the system and/or else new netdecks rising to the top. There's a heap of trouble that such a system could bring in, too. Like penalizing new players who came up with something that just happens to resemble a top netdeck. Or players who play a casual pile of cards centered on a popular interactions but missing crucial components to make it good enough to qualify for a de facto nerf. There are also decks that can survive the replacement of 5 or 6 cards and decks that would be killed by such a measure - so it would be quite tricky to devise a numbers-based filter.
The same goes for any truly casual mode, which I do think would be desireable.

While I don't see the need for any such measure, I'm not opposed either. I just think the suggestions from the OP would create more problems and not solve the issue.
I might add that a system to mitigate the problem periodically rather than continuously is already in place: the monthly rebalance patch. (Which I think will indeed be monthly, at least until the card pool becomes substantially larger.)

 

[Rogue.Eagle]

Actually, and hear me out on this, maybe they should just promote netdecks? Like, show in game the most common types of decks.

I know that sounds really weird at first, but think about it. If you willingly promote something, one of two things will happen. More people will play it, which is already happening, or people will get sick of being recommended stuff and will either make their own thing, or begin to tweak something from those existing decks.

The more people see how much something is being used, the more they will either play it, or the more they would be curious to try something else.

However, the major downside to this is people would see the game as shallow at that point, since it would be made known to them just how prevalent certain things are, and the reasons why they're like that. But it'd also allow people to voice their concerns for things they aren't using, because if they see the actual statistics of dwarfs, then it would be clear to them why that deck is so successful and why another deck might not be, therefore allowing them to help encourage CDPR in creating balance.

But this has too much of a downside. It'd certainly be interesting, though. "Look at top decks for current season!" Click on it and there's the imbalance. At least everyone would be made aware of it, though, including casuals.

 

[Iuliandrei]

(and it's those that people are complaining about - nobody complains if you netdeck a Kambi deck).

You don't seem to understand what this is about. If you copy a deck from a streamer or website it's not a problem, if 2, 5 or even 10 other people copy it, again no problem. However when you have half of the playerbase copying the SAME deck then you start to have a problem. When each game you play is the same, over and over like it's f'ing groundhog day that stops being fun for me, there were days during the dwarf meta i didn't even bother logging for those easy 6 rounds rewards. But it's astonishing me to you don't even acknowledge this difference, which brings me back to the "it's not about the journey but the result" and yes for some people if the win rate is good there's absolutely no difference between playing against different factions/leaders and dwarves only.

And yes i don't think very highly of netdeckers, i saw a lot of people at high MMR wasting my time by READING THE CARD DESCRIPTION during the game, this says a lot about the amount of knowledge or personal requirements needed to get those high ranks.

 

[NomanPeopled]

I think that's more or less what they're trying to do by supporting Twitch streamers (that's still a thing, right?) as well as organizing tournaments. Although in all honesty, CDPR could learn something by taking a closer look at the MtG's PR work.
I don't know what their budget is though so I won't complain too much.

Be that as it may, CDPR is trying to make Gwent an e-sport. That means they need a credible competitive system. Which I think is probably the way to go if they're trying to make Gwent a long-term financial success. Just think about how popular minor league Baseball might be without the big leagues ...

 

[StrykerxS77x]

This ruins the game for me. People unable or unwilling to think for themselves.
I am tired of seeing the exact same decks being played built card for card off some website they found it posted at because they can't use their own brains to win.

Honestly I wish there was a way to ban deck build posting so this could be prevented but of course there isn't.
It just ruins the game and makes it boring due to a lack of variety.

This has nothing to do with whether I beat it or not. I usually do most of the time.
The issue here is it makes the game boring to see the same thing on the other side all the time.

I wish they could do something to encourage people thinking for themselves and discourage cookie cutter website decks.
Perhaps, since it can't be stopped, instead they could do something like reduce ranked point gain advancement when it detects an exact match for posted decks.
This way players thinking for themselves and designing their owns decks would advance faster than those using some posted winning deck strat and result in a greater variety of gameplay from opponents. They could still gain rank if laming out and using someone else's posted deck but advance slower in point gain.
It would also benefit to encourage experimentation.

Bit of a vent I know but also some possible solutions presented.
Just tired of seeing opponents use the exact same decks over and over ruining variety of gameplay. People stop playing cause of stuff like that.

Honestly dude you need to get over this. The decks that are powerful are usually going to look a like because there aren't that many of them. Even if people are copying card for card that is something that will never change. BTW what rank are you because I am seeing some good variety around rank 16. This meta feels FAR better than the last one and one of the most balanced to date. I see nothing that is blatantly over powered and the deck that I am using to progress I made from scratch myself.

 

[StrykerxS77x]

I reckon the people getting defensive about the topic are probably the net deckers

Perhaps some but it is true that complaining about this accomplishes nothing. The OP wishes for something that is impossible. All you can do is ask CDPR to make more variety and balance better.

 

[GenLiu]

You can't blame people for either:
- not wanting to lose every match
- trying out a top deck to see how it works

Either way gwent is a game where at lower ranks, being good with a tier 2 or 3 deck may carry you to victory over someone who plays a tier 1 deck badly.

Netdecks are present in every ccg. What do you think happens after every challenger or a mtg pro tour? The difference between games are how many different 'top decks' they can support. Diversity of meta depends on design decisions and balancing as well as the depth of the card pool. Blaming people for being sheep in a game without enough cards to make those diverse decks doesn't help

Netdecking in Gwent and MTG doesn't have the same meaning.
From my personal experience, I've never met a MTG player who were playing a deck without exactly knowing why and without rethinking the global strategy and make their own adjustements.

For the most part, players who netdeck in Gwent simply copy/past something they saw on the internet without even trying to figure out if the deck works or if they need to change something.

Proof : Look at the number of people playing Henry Var Attre in Reveal when this card is easily the worst silver that have ever been printed for this archetype.

 

[Mnorojo]

I despise net decking as well. I don't enjoy playing these decks again and again. And I hate piloting one because of the lameness of mirror matches. But it's a part of any ccg. I've just learned to accept it

 

[NomanPeopled]

@ GenLiu:
I'vve just made my first reveal deck without recourse to outside sources, and it has Attre. Perhaps it just looks good to players who have no clue about reveal? I mean, it's exactly the sort of card which every newbie would throw into their first reveal deck ...

 

[Theo_FP]

The only way to completely remove netdecking from the game, is to remove any incentives for people to steal decks from websites to begin with. The main culprit right now is the ranked game mode and I do not see that going away anytime soon.


People will do anything to earn meaningless virtual rewards.

 

[nunqmuo]

The only way to completely remove netdecking from the game, is to remove any incentives for people to steal decks from websites to begin with. The main culprit right now is the ranked game mode and I do not see that going away anytime soon.


People will do anything to earn meaningless virtual rewards.

Yeah. As if people don't use netdecks in casual LUL If anything there is more netdecks so in casual than in ranked.

 

[PraytheRosary]

People want to win op, whatever's more practical and wins people will use, manner of fact life's unbalanced, some things are better then others, i believe no video game will ever be balanced because reailty isn't, its impossible, the originality should come from the Factions, artwork, and lore's immersion, bonus if this works with playstyle.

 

[nunqmuo]

People want to win op, whatever's more practical and wins people will use, manner of fact life's unbalanced, some things are better then others, i believe no video game will ever be balanced because reailty isn't, its impossible, the originality should come from the Factions, artwork, and lore's immersion, bonus if this works with playstyle.

I dont know. In my opinion people play video games ( even competitive unless professionally ) for fun. And i dont understand how winning with a powerful meta deck created by someone else ( and lets face it - creating powerful deck is like like 50% of players skill ) is fun. Its not their merit. They dont outplay their opponents. They dont even creat their deck. They simply winning because they have more raw points. Well maybe its just me but id rather play my own fun deck with 50% winrate than play boring meta deck against mirrors and weaker deck ( no sense of achievement upon winning ) with 70% winrate.

 

[NomanPeopled]

@ nunqmo:
I fully agree that building your own deck and having success with it is superior to netdecking and having success with it. And certainly among the motives of netdecking there is the fact that it's easier. I have no doubt that it's comparative simplicity was a major factor in Dwarves' popularity, say. Although people can and do netdeck more complex decks too ... ad well as uncompetitive fun decks.

I don't understand how netdeckers "don't outplay their opponents" though. Assuming that, as you say, 50% of a player's skill is in deckbuilding, then 50% of skill is in playing, is it not?
The skill required to pilot a deck depends on the deck, not its provenance. And in deckbuilding there are archetypes that are easier to build than others, too.

I won't be trying to convince you differently, but I don't see why I need to have invented a deck myself in order to have fun with it.