darklogos said:

To be fair, our own deckbuilding forums are a waste of webspace. I have never seen an era where the UFS Deckbuilding forums were a good source of newfound combos, interesting deck discussions and anything remotely relevant.

Do you want to know why that is?

It's because nobody gives a ****. Excuse the expletive, but that's the only thing that carries the weight of my disgust at what could have been a valid way of discussion on the forums. When have you posted a deck there? How many replies did it get? How many of those were remotely useful or was there to promote discussion? I'm guessing zero. All I know is that, for a lot of people, they posted decks there once or twice, and saw that nobody cared. At all. So, they figured it just wasn't worth typing all of that crap only to have people not even look at it.

I'm sorry, but I write to be read - and knowing that posting in the Deckbuilding forums means that I'm just wasting my time makes it so that I simply don't do it. I recently gave it another chance, and the only answer I got? René, out of pity . I'll grant you that it's not really much of a new idea, but I hadn't seen Ragnar built this way before so I figured it was worth a **** to post. Nobody wants to discuss it. I'd like to say it's because nobody wants to share, but I'd rather say it's because nobody wants to share when there's nobody to read and comment. I'm not helping by saying things like this, I know that very well, but I can't stands no more.

I don't net deck, at least not knowingly. But seriously, to say that it's because of net deckers that the deckbuilding forum is so boring, bland and devoid of any intellectual discourse? That is a lie. It's devoid of interest because it has, in it's long history, served as a haven for thinly veiled elitism (Posts by people who won stuff > People who need help with their goddamned deck in terms of reply and interest or something that hasn't been discussed a thousand times before) and downright insulting posts (zomg why X card isn't in your deck you suck stop playing nao - by the way X card is downright impossible to get for someone who doesn't have 40$ per card to obtain). At one point, I honestly considered that the Soapbox was a better place to discuss UFS than the Deckbuilding forum. You probably weren't around for the Soapbox, but that was even worse than what you know as Off-Topic. About a hundred times worse.

Homme Chapeau said:

I felt like you did. However on a lark I posted the following thread:

http://new.fantasyflightgames.com/edge_foros_discusion.asp?efid=27&efcid=5&efidt=172780&efpag=0

I was really happy with the input that came from the thread, and in the end it resulted in two different really fun decks.

Antigoth said:

I guess my decks aren't interesting enough for you people though.

Homme Chapeau said:

Not true, I've read you builds. Recently I've taken bits and pieces of your Astaroth theme and combined it with my own goals with the character. Just becuase people don't post doesn't mean they aren't reading and paying attention. I even liked Rene's response, made me wish I was in your kneck of your woods to join you for some mini-block beat downs!

- dut

dutpotd said:

Again, I'm not the best advocate of the Deckbuilding forums - I avoid it like many avoided the Soapbox before.

I say it again because what I will say is directly in contradiction, and I know you'll agree with me on that.

If you do not comment, you are part of the problem.

I respond to comments - I genuinely respond to comments. The point is, when you post a deck, you're either looking for input from other players, or wanting to reveal a tech. If it's the former, why are people not giving input? If it's the latter, why are people not curious? I seriously don't think everyone can read every deck off the Internet and immediately know how it works.

With more people visiting the Deckbuilding forums, you get more people who are exposed to actual deck discussion and that have a chance to create said deck discussion. It gets to the point where I'm almost willing to reveal some of the Tiny Syphillis decks I've seen around here just because I want to stimulate discussion there.

The problem? I'm not exactly confident that flooding the Deckbuilding forums with interesting decks is going to create that effect.

Antigoth said:

Net decking from how its been defined to me in the past is people who take a winning deck from online and copy it card for card or piece for piece with no changes at all and operate the deck in only one way.

The last three gaming communites I was in (heroclix, alteil, COH CCG) had massive net decking. The same ideas float around and the only varients were theme and someone being new to the game. Alteil was the only game that promoted card diversity by having deck buliding challenges. This something this game needs very badly. Top 4 decks got playtested and published. Everyone got to see it. People could gain ideas. The last deck I submited I broke the game of Alteil and they had to nerf a limited edittion card. I would have never played or created that deck if not for the challenge.

Heroclix national tournaments was plagued by net decking. A couple of years in a row the same format and 4 select pieces made it into Wizard World Top 8. When you looked at the names and forum handles attached you find out that a lot of them just copied crap from online and that is it. They hardly had a post history and no orginal formation ideas. There were groups similar to UFS house that had their own tech and did win championships but many times they were following the established mold to some degree. Again the lack of contrabution.

The problem is this. Winners aren't forced to expose decks. If you top 8 in a regionals your deck should be posted for all to see. If you top 8 at Gencon your deck should automatically posted. The reason this has to be enforced is to force a shift in the meta and to some extent force contrabution out of those who keep stuff secret. Heck Omar's mill deck is prime example of this. It should have been exposed right after regionals.

I'm trying to be an active force in the deck building forum. Anything legacy I really can't comment on because that card base is to vast for it to be in my head. Lord Aggro and I just finished going back and forth on a Yi Shan deck idea. I posted a Zhao idea that needs to be worked on. You would think that due to the card pool being smaller people would be more likely share ideas and try to show some alterations. But it doesn't really happen.

When I first started I went to team Canada online and saw the article on Chae. I read through the deck and explination. I looked at every card about 5 times on twinheadeddragon. I made changes to the deck. I went and made a list of every legal earth symbol card that was out. I went through all of those cards to try to figure out what worked best. Then I bought cards. I played and published my deck. I got the "why Chae" feedback but I added on to the development of the character.

The community has made deck tech to safe and we see what we have now. Mainly because people don't want strong competetion they just want the best prize in gaming.

Homme Chapeau said:

I agree. And I would have commented on your deck had I had time, I always like to comment! Sad thing was I was late night building a deck for a friend and just skimming all the ones posted for ideas, as stated yours was a large part of the inspiration for what transpired. After I see it in action, tomorrow, I will be better equiped to comment on your deck and others like it.

I'm just saying that there are all sorts of circumstances, behaviors, and other things that stop someone who's read a post from posting a reply. That's all I'm saying, and I don't think we should label the whole community based on that.

- dut

I dont know how this argument became about Netdecking but its an argument that constantly haunts these forums and I that its even discussed.

There are only so many card in the game, there are only so many logical combos, and more often than not decks just come together for most people because we are all thinking about how the game works when we build.

Does it take someone netdecking to realise that you should run Aquakinesis with Experienced combatant. How bout Donavan with low speed attacks. Ivy potm. This applies to every game. Time and time again this argument turns out to be just a way for people to try and coin an idea as their own, even though the game designers likley knew about it well before them.

There is no such thing as Net Decking. There are only so many logical builds you can make. People can figure them out on their own.

dutpotd said:

Again - if it was just me, I wouldn't have a problem with it. However, it's been like that for as long as I can remember, so...

Protoaddict said:

I'm not talking about using a handful of select cards. I'm talking about building decks card for card or more then 80 percent the same from the online source.

Trends and net decking are two different things.

darklogos said:

Not really - sometimes trends start from netdecking. And 80% of a deck is what? 48 cards? That's 12 cards difference, and sometimes, those 12 cards can change a deck so much that it's really not the same deck. Someone who just imitates will die, someone who refines and works on Interwebz teachings and improves on them will thrive.

darklogos said:

darklogos said:

There are some decks out their that are just so logical to put together that you can easily land on 80% of the same cards as everyone else. Is that net decking?

Any astrid build if gonna be full of weapon keywords. How many are their in the current game right now? Provided that you are only using on symbol cards for her there are only 48 cards that match at least one symbol with her and have the weapon keyword. 14 have all, 32 have fire, 16 order. Now consider the fact that some of thoes cards are just a given to be included no matter what, like Envoy of the Queen, Pommel Smash, Hildies weapon, and from what i have been hearing reaver ax, relentless, dual wielding are all no brianers as well in this new environment. Afterwards you obviously have to fill the deck up with only so many attacks (just pommel wont cut it) and there are obviously some that make more sense than others right now (Hadies ax dosent really make a ton of sense with very little mod in the game for instance.)

That being said who cares really. If you copy a deck off the internet and go to a tourney with it, its already been on the internet. Everyone knows about it and knows what it does. Thats a disadvantage. That plus I cant think of any real builds in the past year or so that won a tourney then was netdecked and went on to win another tourney, save for chun li perhaps, and that was more because of how easy the chun li deck came together without any netdeking what so ever.

So if net decking is not taboo why the lack of disclouser of decks? Why isn't there more of a clamour when deck lists of top 8 from big tournaments are not posted? If folks are okay with copying then nothing is wrong copying a proven deck. There wouldn't be complaints about diversity since there is a consensus that clones are not a threat to the original. If you all give account for the community having giving a green light to net decking is correct then why isn't the pressures of exposer higher?

In short if originality is a moot point then why is diversity ever an issue?

Because half the people who played dont want to post decks because they didnt preform well. Why post a loosing deck? That player will know why they lost and what they need to change from play experience more so that what anyone can tell them on the forums.

Another quarter of them cant be bothered, either because real life takes too much time for them to post yesterdays news.

The last quarter, to my knowledge, do post them. I think all of the top 8 and the some from GenCon are in the DB forums.

Also Major tourneys tend to be held on dates right before set releases. So deck lists are usually outdated by the time people post them. The rest are obvious and get no real feedback from the community because there is nothing to be said. Oh your running hildie, why not use heal snipe or lynx tail, dur dur dur.

Really the thing here is that it should be incumbent upon FFG to post Decklists after major events, because god knows half the time after gencon as soon as the event is over I dismantle the deck and sell it for parts. I cant remember every card some times so why post something incomplete.

Netdecking has happened in every CCG every made and I do not know why it's become such a 4 letter word at all. People post tactics and strategies for fighting games online all the time, no one is calling them Net Comboers. No ones ideas are original in the end and anythign that is close to it usually is that way because it sacrifices feasibility in a tourney setting to do something goofy.

Protoaddict said:

Actually, that half of the people might not post them not because the deck lost, but because they know nobody's gonna care - it lost. The deck might be the most awesome thing ever if someone else just tweaked it, but who's going to read about a losing deck?

What you two are showing me is a culture that doesn't truly care about deck contents and strategem. Even a loosing deck has something to learn from. Looking at its match up and seeing functionaly why it lost is essential in deck development process. I now know not to expect this element from the community. At the same time I understand why tech is the way it is. The general assumption is that since the elite or well versed see something then all see the same thing or the operation of x components is obvious. Since this view represents majority culture such things as the deck building forums are nothing more then a convience for the community so that deck designs do not clutter general chat. This makes scouts extremely powerful in certain markets because they have access to whole deck list of the entire tourney and if they wanted to they could do lots of data crunching on deck design.

I see that my experience in other games may be unique and do not apply to the culture of this game. Thanks for the insight.

darklogos said:

Top 8's aren't posted because there is nothing enforcing tournament organizers to post deck lists.

Speaking as an organizer who constantly posts his top cuts of major events, it is work, and something that I do because I believe that the game needs the knowledge shared.

To an extent shouldn't it be expected out of a judge. Each player has to submit an acurate deck list for major tournament. If it is difficult there is always scanning.

darklogos said:

Tried that... it doesn't work as well... so it's manually typing out each one.

I've also tried having everyone bring it on USB keys.

that didn't work so well.

But then again... I haven't missed typing out one of my UFS top cuts.

Are you a scout?

Personally, I'd love to see 2nd, 3rd, 4th place etc. Just because a deck lost doesn't always mean it's worse.

Take the top two winning decks, and put 'em against each other a dozen times.... Maybe the original out come will be repeated over and over, and one deck is definitivly better. Or maybe luck, or player skill entered into it to an extent and the "better" deck lost. I can happen. It does happen. And it has happened.

As far as Netdecking being a 4 letter word... it kind of is to me, because I like to maintain my originality. That means building the deck first, then looking and seeing if there is maybe a better way to do things, a better card to add or whatever. I've looked at a deck before on teh forums and it's been w/in 80% of my deck. I mostly don't post because I'm lazy. I, and I think everyone should try harder. Especially I'd love to see more decks from the folks who have thier own cards, and the folks who regularly top 8 at big events.