PidgeyCornerFTW
New Member
I've only started playing the Pokemon TCG competitively since 2010. Naturally, I had no idea what a good deck would look like. My initial "competitive" deck ended up being horrible, with many one-of trainers and chunks of weird Pokemon lines thrown in altogether. There was no strategy to the deck at all. Naturally, I, a then-new player, kept getting thrashed by all the competitive decks out there.
Then I started to learn more about "metagame" decks. I remember my first competitive deck was DialgaChomp. The "noob" in me knew absolutely nothing about a proper "deck engine" - I had to google decklists and copy them card-for-card (netdeck). Netdecking really helped me get into the competitive playing field, and without all those decklists online I don't think I would've built subsequent successful decks like LuxChomp, VileGar, and Gyarados.
However, netdecking has had its share of criticism, especially among experienced players. I've heard things like "netdecking discourages originality and is bad for the game", "netdecking defeats the purpose of deckbuilding", and "if everyone copies each other's decklists, where's the point in playing?" I'm not saying these views are wrong; I can understand why players with decklists winning consistently are reluctant to share the lists which they have spent countless playtesting time to fine-tune (I've been in that position before, where people pester me for my tournament-winning lists).
I quote Esa Juntunen in his article on The Deck Out:
I'd just like to hear the community's views on netdecking.
Then I started to learn more about "metagame" decks. I remember my first competitive deck was DialgaChomp. The "noob" in me knew absolutely nothing about a proper "deck engine" - I had to google decklists and copy them card-for-card (netdeck). Netdecking really helped me get into the competitive playing field, and without all those decklists online I don't think I would've built subsequent successful decks like LuxChomp, VileGar, and Gyarados.
However, netdecking has had its share of criticism, especially among experienced players. I've heard things like "netdecking discourages originality and is bad for the game", "netdecking defeats the purpose of deckbuilding", and "if everyone copies each other's decklists, where's the point in playing?" I'm not saying these views are wrong; I can understand why players with decklists winning consistently are reluctant to share the lists which they have spent countless playtesting time to fine-tune (I've been in that position before, where people pester me for my tournament-winning lists).
I quote Esa Juntunen in his article on The Deck Out:
I think the number one thing we can learn from this is that netdecking IS good for the game. It helps the game become more versatile (in case of new decks) and even if it doesn’t make the game more versatile, it develops the quality of the decks.
Netdecking is as it best when people take an already “invented” deck and make their own spins for them. That way simple decks like Cobalion/tech Kyurem/Electrode can turn into Kyurem/Cobalion/Terrakion/Jirachi/Electrode. All this in mere months. I really enjoy watching how the players all over the world take a deck idea that I’m able to reveal from Japan and turn it into a great but slightly different deck.
I'd just like to hear the community's views on netdecking.