Ariadosman
New Member
I don't know, but I would say that deliberately using a worse deck just to hinder your chances of winning doesn't say anything about your skill level.
Do we spend too much time worrying about deckbuilding?
- Thread starter FunnyBear
- Start date
- Status
I don't know, but I would say that deliberately using a worse deck just to hinder your chances of winning doesn't say anything about your skill level.
afstandopleren
New Member
I find it hillarious that a deck is only considered worse if it doesn't have Luxray GL, Kingdra, Machamp, Gengar, Crobat G, Claydol, Uxie and whatnot in it. I find this stupid and disturbing because everyone can Poketurn, Flash Bite/Birght Look or attack hard for little Energy and call it skill. There are a lot of cards that are bombarded rogue thanks to the silly meta people create but still can do fine due to usually overpowered cards that are released and intoxicate everyone that's win/power hungry. And yes, being able to beat up decks that everyone plays like Gyarados with something completely unexpected like Beautifly is SKILL. It's something I don't see you doing anytime soon, Ariadosman.
baby mario
Front Page Article Editor<br><a href="http://pokeg
What is there about a Beautifly deck that makes it more difficult or more skillful to play than Gyarados or Luxape?
Is it just because the deck is less effective, and therefore you have to work harder (and need more luck!) in order to win with it?
In which case, why not play . . . I dunno . . . Miltank? Imagine the skill you would need to win with that!
afstandopleren
New Member
And your point is...? In comparison, Beautifly can hit harder and has more HP, giving it a chance to hold itself in the ridiculous meta. In fact, winning with Miltank requires more luck then if I would win with Beautifly, so your point is a flawed one. I'm definitely not able to take your post serious that way, Baby Mario.
baby mario
Front Page Article Editor<br><a href="http://pokeg
Well, I am struggling to see what your point is exactly.
Why are you playing Beautifly? That is what I am really asking.
Is it cos you believe it takes more skill to play than other decks? If so, then how, exactly?
Is it cos you believe that it can work it this format? If so, then how is that different from someone choosing a meta deck for the same reason?
Is it cos you just want to be 'different'? If so, then obviously you know there is a price to pay for that in competitiveness.
Why are you playing Beautifly? That is what I am really asking.
Is it cos you believe it takes more skill to play than other decks? If so, then how, exactly?
Is it cos you believe that it can work it this format? If so, then how is that different from someone choosing a meta deck for the same reason?
Is it cos you just want to be 'different'? If so, then obviously you know there is a price to pay for that in competitiveness.
afstandopleren
New Member
The reason I play with it, is because I believe in it's potential, which it has proven over over time that it has...to me (Playing it with the right cards such as Potion and PokeBlower+). I've given up on being original (Café Noir was the beginning and the end of that) and yet, I'll always be that as I by default, don't like Archetypes that much. I personally prefer to go for a real challenge, playing decks that require more strategy and skill then flipping some coins or playing some Poketurns in order to win a game. Timing Potions, PokeBlower+ and Warp Points right, as well as knowing when to use Colorfull Powder or Silver Scale, wins Beautifly games and Beautifly is 1 of the few decks out there that really has only 1 real autoloss: Luxray GL with Lucario GL. I guess I just like to be against all odds.
baby mario
Front Page Article Editor<br><a href="http://pokeg
The part in bold could easily be re-written as:
See what I did there? Beautifly does not inherently take more skill or strategy to play well than Luxape.
afstandopleren
New Member
Maybe in your opinion, in my opinion it does not. Mind you, Luxape has more heal (Poketurn)and other SP stuff that actually helps it win games. Sure, beautifly can be fully walled by Unown G, but that's why Silver Scale, Warp Point and PokeBlower+ exist in my deck: To deal with it. It's not as mindless as you portray Beautifly like I portray Luxape to be.
SLOW DECK
New Member
You make it sound like that Martin had his list filled out by someone else, was given the before the first round, he shuffled the cards, drew seven cards and said, oh look a Holon Castform, what does this do?
We know Pooka is a great deck builder, in fact he is one of the best deck builder I know. Your point was made, but just because you used Kyle's list, does that mean that you stink at deck building? As much as one gives Martin that Nat's crown, many of us view that just as much Pooka's nat's championship, seriously Delta v Delta in the championship?
On the point, I find that difficult to comprehend that you guys agreed to play the deck with out any sense that delta was a great play. (I saw it just before nat's and it took me 30 seconds to realize the delta brillance)
I will conceed this point though, great players, with a strong and consistent deck (theirs or someone elses), will win more often than not. In fact, I will often critical of some of the better players when their decks are over tech, then the will have too many dead hand losses to people that they clearly better.
I totally understand where you are coming from.
I've been in your place before and I know many people with the same mentality as you.
You play Beautifly, and I assume you don't win as much as those playing SP/Machamp/Gengar/Flygon/mainstream decks. You associate others winning with playing an 'easy' deck that requires no skill. You associate your winning with playing a deck that requires a huge amount of skill to work perfectly and win the game. You need to cut these associations, because they are all premade and they are false.
You need to realize that hard does not mean 'more skill required' and easy does not mean 'less skill required'.
Any competitive deck requires an enormous amount of skill to play, even the simple decks like Kingdra. You have a ton of different decks in the format that you must know how to play against. You have to know how to handle each matchup, when to do certain stuff, when to pull out a certain tech, what to tech in the first place to improve matchups.
Beautifly doesn't win as much as mainstream decks NOT because it requires more skill to play, but because it is a WORSE card. When I say worse, I mean that Beautifly lacks in either the area of speed, damage, HP, or all the areas compared to the mainstream decks.
I'm not saying that Beautifly doesn't require skill to play. Any card being played requires skill to play, though. You playing Mismagius/Bibarel takes skill to play. You playing Luxape also takes skill to play.
And I'm not saying that Beautifly is a bad card.
I'm just saying that just because the mainstream decks are winning doesn't mean they require less skill. And you shouldn't distance yourself from the mainstream decks because your self-made associations with them. If you want to increase the chances of you doing well in the future, you need to play some of the mainstream cards. You can keep playing WORSE cards if you want, but there is a good chance that you will never win as much as you could if you were playing mainstream cards.
And I understand if you don't want to break your morals and play the same deck everyone else is playing. You want to feel special, special that you aren't just another Luxape player. But in reality, you're not special, regardless of the deck you play, because no idea is 100% original. There is no 'one' creator of a deck. The deck you play is close to the same deck that others have come up with too.
So, really, you don't have anything to lose and you have a lot to gain if you play some of the mainstream decks. Don't let your self-made associations or your strive to be 'original' hold you back from showcasing your skill and winning the game you should be winning.
I dunno, there's a certain aspect of the game that I rather miss from "the old days", meaning the WotC era. Back then, most rare cards could be built into a decent deck. Now, we have a lot of rare cards that seem like filler and aren't top-notch. It takes out the choice of playing Pokemon you like.
For example, Ampharos is one of my favorite Pokemon. I have an Ampharos SW deck that I lvoe to play with in casual play. It would get served its own head on a platter in a tournament, but I enjoy playing it, so that's what counts, nyes?
For example, Ampharos is one of my favorite Pokemon. I have an Ampharos SW deck that I lvoe to play with in casual play. It would get served its own head on a platter in a tournament, but I enjoy playing it, so that's what counts, nyes?
ryanvergel
New Member
I was just trying to say that although Martin is a great deck builder, there are definitely instances where one can show entirely in-game skill, no deckbuilding skill (if you had no input in the list, and made no changes, you havent displayed any deckbuilding skill besides the choice to trust someone else lol) and have that produce amazing success (best tournament record ever), and the point of all that was just to say that I don't think deck-building/in-game skill are the same, but rather that one usually follows the other, but not necessarily or because they are some form of the same thing.
It is pretty amusing to think that Martin was learning the tricks of the deck as his opponent was. But I'm sure by the end of the tournament, after facing tough competition and using a great, consistent list, Martin developed a better sense of the deck.
Phazon Elite
New Member
Agreed entirely.
I thought that way for a long time, and only came out with ONE good deck that was blatantly original yet somehow good (Meganium UF with that old Dual-Type Magcargo that killed Steelix ex with Pidgeot FRLG. So much fun). Aside form that, I'd use original decks . . . just to be original. Jirachi-Muk ex was obviously for idiots who didn't know how to play, as was Medicham ex, Metanite, and every old archetype ever. Then, I got tired of getting 5th, so I finally started using established decks (A standard Magmortar deck, but with Cessation Crystals), and I started winning! And now I'm #2 in the world in rankings (last time the site was up, anyway), just because I stopped building stupid decks with unrealistic expectations. The time I spent using Archetypes helped me understand what makes a good deck . . . good, so that I can actually build decks that are specific to my playstyle while still being extremely effective (like FGD).
I have no idea if afstandopleren is having the same issues I was, but it's a nice mini-bio for like-minded people to read, anyway. : )
Master Yoda
New Member
i totally agree with you dude!
hate to open xx booseter packs and see all the rare cards which are more than bad.
okay, i know much cards are created for a japanese format like 30 card deck and some cards are good in and bad in our card pool.
Yes he did the night before nationals at like midnight my friend Paul and I played a couple games against him with Ludicargo and we didnt lose that bad so I figured it wasnt that good. Then he X-0's. I felt pretty stupid.
afstandopleren
New Member
@Prime: I'm seriously thankful to you. I've always felt like I was missing something about the game and I just couldn't put my finger on it while you just did.
DarthPika
New Member
I completely agree that you don't HAVE to build the deck to do well with it. I actually had never used my nats deck until the day OF the tourney. I managed a cool 6-2 record in swiss, even though I had never used the deck before. However, I will say that having a very good understanding of how decks actually work by spending a lot of time building them helped immensely. Even though I had never actually used that exact deck before, I was able to use my knowledge of how other decks that were simmilar worked to my advantage. It's not something I really recomend doing, and it's not something I would probably do again, but it is deffinitly possible to do well with a deck you've never used before.
That being said, I do very much prefer to have a long time to spend working on my deck before a tourney, learning all the tricks and such. Makes tourneys a lot less stressfull. lol
ninetales1234
<a href="http://pokegym.net/gallery/browseimages.p
Netdecking will not get you anywhere. From my experience, I always have to work on my skill, my ability to play the deck well. Anytime I take someone else's deck, I always have to modify it to my playing style. There is a bad way to play the best top tier decks.
In my opninion, this debate about what aspects of this game are more important will never end. There are too many different camps of people from different backgrounds with different persectives and experiences.
Put some cards together, post your list on Pokegym, listen to advice, and play a few league matches before you go into a tournament.
In my opninion, this debate about what aspects of this game are more important will never end. There are too many different camps of people from different backgrounds with different persectives and experiences.
Put some cards together, post your list on Pokegym, listen to advice, and play a few league matches before you go into a tournament.
- Status