Ways to Approach the Game
- Thread starter cabd
- Start date
- Status
baby mario
Front Page Article Editor<br><a href="http://pokeg
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.
Qwachansey
Active Member
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?
baby mario
Front Page Article Editor<br><a href="http://pokeg
The problem is that calling anything non-meta 'rogue' just makes the word meaningless and indirectly insults the true rogue deck builders.
If you are going to use the same word to describe a carefully built, successful metagame counter, and a terrible fail deck using bad cards for the sake of being 'original' . . . well, what's the point? The word doesn't mean a thing if you can use it for both.
Qwachansey
Active Member
Hmmmm, I see your point, but what word is there besides?
baby mario
Front Page Article Editor<br><a href="http://pokeg
Simplified version . . .
Meta decks/archetype - including known archetypes that don't get played much
Rogue decks - non-meta decks that can perform successfully against the meta - the best will become archetypes. Recent examples are Gyarados and Sablelock
Bad decks - non-meta decks that try to win but fail
Fun decks - decks that people play because they like the Pokemon or a particular mechanic, regardless of whether they are competitive
Theme decks
Meta decks/archetype - including known archetypes that don't get played much
Rogue decks - non-meta decks that can perform successfully against the meta - the best will become archetypes. Recent examples are Gyarados and Sablelock
Bad decks - non-meta decks that try to win but fail
Fun decks - decks that people play because they like the Pokemon or a particular mechanic, regardless of whether they are competitive
Theme decks
vaporeon
Moderator
Yanmega and Mag Prime are more anti meta if anything and not having to play a mirror is always a plus. I'd like to see more games like that. That way you woun't have anyone complaining about 'if I got this I would have won'. I hate hearing that.
---------- Post added 06/16/2011 at 05:58 PM ----------
That was more of a what I have been seeing thing. It happens way too often in the game where people will try to get out of a KO. That is cheating but I was not refering to netdecking though.
I'm the most succesful player in Mexico and I have never once used the same deck I used at Nationals in Worlds as well. And my best year, 2005, I got 2nd place with Blaziken and then pwned the world with Queendom, so yeah he is trolling, quite heavily...
ooh i have one!
Don't waste your time at Nats with Pidgeot / Vaporeon.
Unless you are just a really giving person that enjoys gifting others with a free win.
If you have already discovered this to be true, please accept my humble apology.
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.
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.
vanderbilt_grad
New Member
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.
Donezator
New Member
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
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
vaporeon
Moderator
Its has nothing to do with being narrow minded. Please explain what growth it offers to the game other then play this and win.
---------- Post added 06/17/2011 at 01:15 PM ----------
I don't want anyone to play like me. All I want is some common ground here. I'm sure we all have something in common.
---------- Post added 06/17/2011 at 01:16 PM ----------
I'm still looking over cards so I might find something I like.
baby mario
Front Page Article Editor<br><a href="http://pokeg
What do you mean by 'growth' of the game?
How does playing meta hurt it?
How does playing non-meta help it?
vaporeon
Moderator
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.
baby mario
Front Page Article Editor<br><a href="http://pokeg
This comment makes me think that you don't understand meta decks or meta players at all.
Actually, it has nothing to do with meta players, just successful players in general.
They are ALWAYS looking for new ideas, combos and techs to give them an advantage against other players. Any player that just picks 'something that wins' is going to come unstuck when they come up against someone whose list is better teched for mirror, or which includes some strategies that they are not aware of.
As an example, Luxchomp teched with Mesprit and Seeker was a very good play earlier in the season.
New ideas can be subtle variations that give you an edge. That's people learning and growing as a player.
This might surprise you, but meta players DO test new combos and different cards all the time. They test them to see if they work or not. If they don't . . . well, why would I take a deck to a tournament if I know it's just going to get smashed?
Victory Bell
Member
It would be nice if everyone could play different decks and win but people want to beat the best players of the game, most of which play meta. In order to do this they have to be play decks with the ability to compete. Old and same old>New in most cases.
Very few people will chose to grow the game over consistently being able to compete with the game's top brass.
Don't look at meta decks so negatively. This format's and MD-on's meta are two totally different things. The current meta is much easier to compete against imo.
Meta doesn't hurt the game as much as you seem to think. In fact, I learned this game on a meta deck Gardevoir EX (the real one not the crappy fire type). I felt like I could compete, eventually leading me to play in events, get destroyed with my poorly built archetype, and proceed to make it better.
Very few people will chose to grow the game over consistently being able to compete with the game's top brass.
Don't look at meta decks so negatively. This format's and MD-on's meta are two totally different things. The current meta is much easier to compete against imo.
Meta doesn't hurt the game as much as you seem to think. In fact, I learned this game on a meta deck Gardevoir EX (the real one not the crappy fire type). I felt like I could compete, eventually leading me to play in events, get destroyed with my poorly built archetype, and proceed to make it better.
- Status