You must not read my posts in other threads very often. I agree with you that it creates a false sense that people who play these decks just off of netdecking think they are good players, and to an extent, you are correct. There are many people I have witnessed played Luxchomp/Vilegar who were originally not that impressive of players and they surfed to top cut. This is a very true statement. I admit I have been guilty of this act once in my life, having played a C&P version of Banbliss I found on this site for Nationals. I went 6-1 in the pre-nationals tournament as a way to test, then went 6-3 in the main event, cruising to T64, and beating some impressive players on my way there. Funny thing, however. My only testing of this deck was right there. I knew how to play the deck due to prior use of Blissey and Banette in previous tournaments, I just wanted to try something I thought worked. How much hilarity I found when I found out that Jimmy Ballard and co. had the same deck variant in mind for the tournament. It wasn't the same list I found, nor did I C&P their specific list. I just found a random person's Banbliss whose name I don't even remember nor recognize on the gym.
Does this make me a bad player by your means? I would certainly hope not. I've learned from the list that I created, and I've made a lot of my lists similar to this one, in the art of making decks as consistent as possible. If learning is a sin, then I will be the first to burn for it, because I like to learn in the process.
Well, since you knew how to use the deck already, copying something like that is harmless. It just made it that much easier for you to do well at nats.
Complaining about not making it to the top tables while everyone else is sitting up there.. well.. I need only link this.
http://www.sirlin.net/articles/playing-to-win-part-1.html
I apologize if I offend you by linking this, but your statements are as true as this article gets.
Son, don't apologize for something that you want to burn me for. If you're going to burn me, then do it right. Do you think I'm going to apologize for anything that I said, or will say....... NO!! I stand by my statements, and fight till the bitter end. You call that a low blow? Don't make me laugh.
This entire statement then contradicts your above statement. You tell me first that these players are getting to the top tables by making decks that don't belong to them, then you're telling me that they're the most complicated strategic decks in the format. I would be inclined to disagree with you on the fact that these are both difficult decks. Luxchomp's hardest matchup is mirror and other SP variants. Against anyone else, its autopilot. I've bore witness to many a scrub playing Luxchomp and making top cut, only to lose to a better SP player, and Vilegar is really just autopilot in general. Get Vileplume evolved asap, Shadow Room until you know your opponent has enough cards to polter. Its hardest matchup is Dialgachomp. Granted, there is some guess work involved if you don't play Lookers/some hand reveal card, but that does actually take knowing a persons deck and I've won a few of my games off of clutch statistics.
So you're saying Luxchomp and Vilegar are auto pilot? It's true that it looks easy when good people are playing it and when they explain it, but you've got to admit that there is more to it than that.
I suggested these decks to players wanting to get INTO competitive play and to do well. You notice I did not suggest to them Dialgachomp, Sablelock, or Gyarados, no? All three of these decks play off of long games in which one misplay could cost you big. Better to let a new player learn by giving them a simpler deck with more control aspects and witness the metagame for themselves, than to feed them to the wolves only to epic fail using Dialgachomp because they promoted wrong and now don't have enough energy to get off the field.
Now if they WANTED to be competitive and have the money, then more power to them. I don't have a problem with that. Some players, just want to play a certain deck because it looks cool, and awesome. What do you tell them if they want to play something like Dialgachomp/Gyarados etc....
If they're playing for fun at league, theres no reason for me to say: "Oh here, build Dialgachomp/Luxchomp etc", but I do have players who want to play like I do. And for those players, I do assist them in stepping it up a notch. Starter decks are fine and dandy for people wanting to have fun and learn, and I promote that fun learning environment at my league, but I don't think I would suggest a starter deck to someone wanting to up their game, telling me they wanted to win.
Example in case. I go to another league in the area and I meet a seniors player who asked me and the league owner of that location for assistance on a deck. He tells me he's going to regionals and he wants help with a deck of his. He currently has Vileplume/Bellossom made, as a sense of lock. I smile and tell him its a cool deck idea, but I know the kid is relatively competitive, and puts on this competitive face every time he plays. Due to this factor, I then ask him this.
"Do you want to win?"
His response was a predictable "Yes."
I nod and then I show him a better combination. Inspired by my action, he uses the rest of his league time here and a following day to pick up supplies for Vilegar. He NARROWLY missed top cut at regionals and played exceptionally well. Is this wrong that I promote a positive attitude while helping a kid do really good when I know that in a heavily competitive environment, without that fainting spell, he doesn't have an inkling of a chance? I think not. Yes, he C&P'd a list that I gave him, but this makes him bad because he didn't think for himself? Not everyone knows how to make decks, I'm sorry, its just not a part of some peoples itinerary.
That's fine, I have no problem with that.
You put words in my mouth, yet I probably worded my paragraph wrong. I don't just decide: "OH HEY GUYS HERE HAVE A NEW DECK. ITS REALLY AWESOME ITS CALLED LUXCHOMP LOLOLOL", I do promote fun and interesting deck ideas at my league, and I've taken a few dares by some of the people there to make cards that shouldn't work and make them work, which really makes people intrigued by my ability. Someone dared me to make Wailord work. I did it with ease. People saw this and asked me how I did it, and I told them "That it takes time, but learning what cards synergize with others, as well as a solid supporter/trainer engine benefits greatly."
I won't just give them a metadeck though as soon as they join. I see a lot of kids just playing cards to play cards and earn promos and free cards that I give away from my collection. There are some who are interested in stepping up, and some who aren't. That's fine. People come to league for leisure time and to have fun outside of school, work, college. Some people come to test their high end decks too. I don't just play my main decks against league kids, thats about as disheartening as me pulling out Sabledonk and winning Turn 1. Now, I do get the occasional joke from one of the older guys to their new friend who is like: "Go ask Steve to play his tournament deck, you'll have fun." I of course warn him he's on a different level of play if he does, and he jokingly goes along with it. I show him what happens, and he's like: "How can I play like that?!" I've got his attention and I give him a couple tips, but don't go into it.
You may not agree with my actions, however I have one player who I trained as a senior who is now a masters player who is now one of the best players in the state of Ohio. I taught him with an easy deck, Mario, back when MT was released. He won every BR he went to. He evolved to Gardevoir/Gallade and won 3 cities, came in Top 4 at regionals, and unfortunately missed his chance to compete at nats. He is now standing with some of the best players in this state, and he beats me on a regular basis. I'm also training another masters player and two Juniors, one of which just made his first top 4 in regionals this past month. He learned off of Luxchomp, which is saying something about his skill level. They're having a blast with the game, and his mother encourages both of them to play their hardest all the time.
I have no problem with giving them a easy list to use. Now learning off of luxchomp is impressive for him.
I don't give just anyone hard decks, contrary to your sentence. However, my ability to make them decks gives them the chance to think. After I showed the Juniors player his first deck, he had no issues making Dialgachomp or Vilegar on his own without my help. THAT says something.
The other masters player I'm teaching just moved up from Seniors and I gave him a simplistic Donphan list, he top 4 at a cities with it and while he can't make it to nationals this year, he wants to learn so his next season can be his explosive year, and has moved up to more difficult decks.
Ok, that is autopilot.
You have a point, not everyone learns like that. However, being an inspiration to help these kids learn will make them better, net deck or not. I learned from my nationals experience with Banbliss. I'm a semi-good player in this state, and I make my own decks. I haven't net decked since that year (Okay I lied, I played Magnerock, but I altered Morten's version)
Ha!! Gotcha!! :lol: Actually, I know many people who copied that deck and actually used it at states this year and did pretty well with it. That will happen with any red face powder deck that wins like that. After that it becomes a meta deck, which means that a lot of players will know about it. How to play it, and how to beat it.
Not everyone who net-decks are pompous. I admit, I'm letting my ego show a little here, but I'll be modest in saying that I'm only a decent player, not an excellent player, however I have some cred to back up my ability, and I would be totally happy to play anyone who speaks of my skill otherwise. I learned my lesson in the ways of rogue before Banbliss. I never top cut or won a tournament. I've cut numerous times since.
There are different types of netdeckers. It's only certain ones that are a problem. Showing off to me doesn't mean anything. My beef really isn't against you. It's against those who do stuff like what that guy did off of 6prizes. You don't have to prove anything to me.
I am also passionate about making decks. I like trying new things, but crossing the line between trying new things and winning.. well, lets just say I like winning better. Scholarships to pay for my college is nice. Calling me, or anyone who does do it a plagiarist is offensive, and I hope you realize that when you say that. You may be right, some people are really just doing it to try to win, but that's playing to win, and that too, is okay. Questioning how someone wins is a scrub mentality. Some other people do it to learn and to refine their own deck process, which is also okay.
There is nothing wrong with winning. But it's how you go about it that makes you a true winner. Shoot, I want to win too. But I don't take other peoples list though. Now I do know how to play with all of the popular decks and their concepts, due to researching, playing, and playing against them. Therefore, If I wanted to make one of those decks, I could do that. It's just like you playing Banbliss at nats.
I do promote people making alterations to my list, but when they do, I ask them their reasoning. If they've got a logical argument for it, cool.
