It's just sad how much the game changed. You got people who try to sneak out of a Pluspower KO, find a way to cheat their opponents and take advantage of less experience and that's not right. Right now we have people trying to figure out how to make Zekrom donk. I mean really? Leave the donks in the last format and come up with something new.
While I may prefer playing rogue decks, I still design them for beating non - rogue decks.... yes, I can fun winning.
A 'rogue' deck that can't win shouldn't be allowed to devalue the word 'rogue'. It is nothing more or less than a bad deck.
IMO any non - meta deck is "rogue" in a sense, whether good or bad. Perhaps not purchased theme decks since those are assembled for you. As long as it has a way to win that is not the same style (by which I mean Dragon Rush, not taking 6 Prizes) as another top tier deck, how else can it be defined?
@Vaporeon, I took Yanmega/Magnezone to battle roads and never saw a mirror match. Is that acceptable in your eyes, or am iI still playing "meta" by using it?
@Qwachansey: a good point, I don't think a deck that cannot beat meta decks really qualifies as rogue to me
You have two VERY different things in the same paragraph.
Cheating is wrong pure and simple. It doesn't matter who does it or why. It has nothing to do with originality or netdecking or even playing for fun. I've seen plenty of people try and cheat when they are playing a non meta deck in a casual game.
As for your point about Zekrom . . . of course people are going to try and make the most out of that card. I mean, that's part of the skill and challenge of the game. You try and make a card/deck as powerful as possible. Isn't that what you try and do with your Pidgeot/Vaporeon deck? Or do you somehow make it deliberately crappy so that winning with it is even more of a challenge? Is that what you expect people to do with Zekrom?
A 'rogue' deck that can't win shouldn't be allowed to devalue the word 'rogue'. It is nothing more or less than a bad deck.
I remember German champions took almost the same deck to worlds that they took to nationals, the same goes for Argentina, Canada and Mexico representatives... I know they only got as far as top 32 but they took the same decks from NC and LCQ to the WC, anybody has the decknames of the japanese NC winners from 2010?
Any tips you have to share with us small people.
Back on topic. I'll always feel that netdecking will always be unhealthy for the game. I feel those players don't really contribute anything to the game because it does not promote growth. People are going to play the way they want but it's robs the fun from the game. People are supposed to go into tournaments with having fun in mind and they don't.
This is because you've never bothered to really understand them or how they think. Vap, you are very narrow minded and stuck in your own personal definition of what "fun", "growth", and such are.
After reading this entire thread, It's clear that everyone's going around in circles. The very terms 'NetDeck' and 'Rogue' seem to have lost all meaning, and now describe how 'good' and 'bad' players win there games. Not all good players and 'NetDeckers', and on the other hand not all 'Rogue' decks are automatically going to do worse in larger tournaments. At the end of the day, the deck is only one factor in winning a game - Luck being another big one.
Looking at Vaporeons stubbornness really puzzles and amazes me at the same time. Believe it or not, not everyone has to play like you and use your kind of decks and approach the game and play it in the same way as you. Everyone plays the game differently. From reading your posts Ive gathered the impression that what you're trying to do is get everyone to think and act like you, which completely contradicts the SOTG.
Really, I think stepping back sometimes and looking at someone elses views and not just your own will help you improve more than trying to prove everyone else wrong with your own narrow-minded views. And failing quite horrifically.
Donezator
Leafeon? I thought you would be playing something like... Muk, without swift dangerous psychics in this format and heavy retreat cost, there`s a good chance to play almost anything, as long as they dont have a fire weakness or low HP.
Pidiot might not be skillfull, but Unfezant is annoying as hell, with catcher not being released yet, warp point out of format, circulator in thrash cans, and unreliable reversal, you only need to gather enough lucky charms and it might have a chance to own the top tables. I can`t think of any Bird pokemon that could be played with skill, Gliscor is a good revenge killer against electrics, but the attack power is not really impressive against anything else.
Its has nothing to do with being narrow minded. Please explain what growth it offers to the game other then play this and win.
What do you mean by 'growth' of the game?
How does playing meta hurt it?
How does playing non-meta help it?
What I mean by it is promoting new ideas, combos, etc. Playing meta does not hurt, so to speak but it does not promote looking for new idea. Why make your own deck when you can play something that wins. Playing non meta can promote growth because it shows other players combos that they would not have thought of, both competitive and non competitive and can make those players come up with new deck ideas. If you can show one of them, they can go out and show other.
Thats what I mean by growth. Playing meta takes away a large part of that. Of coure you all wont agree with me so it don't really matter.