good idea, in theory

I can't say I'm happy about the anonymous decks in Ranked play. It seems great at first, no chess matches going back and forth as people change decks to try and get an advantage. The downside to this is when in doubt, only play the best decks. I've played 5 ranked matches today and I have gone against discard every time.There's a reason for it. The decks in this game are all made to be strong against certain decks and weak against others. There are only a couple of standalone decks that are strong against most decks and in an unknown situation will give you the best chances to win regardless of what deck you go up against. In two weeks those will be the only decks you ever see played in ranked matches as people wise up about what decks excel here. It was bad before, but at least you had the ability to switch around, but now that freedom has been taken away. Sure it's more like a tournament, but in tournament play, people also aren't building decks that are purposely weak against half the other decks there. And with no sideboard, the disparity is even greater. Might as well just narrow the playable deck list down to 2 or 3 and get ready to play the same thing over and over and over and over. And over. Hopefully you can see the other decks in nonranked so people will be encouraged to play a wider variety, cause that's where I'm heading. I'm already sick of this. First they *** up the ranking system by matching people in the top 500 against people ranked 30,000, now they make 80% of the decks obsolete. GG.


Discussion Info

Last updated July 3, 2018 Views 0 Applies to:

Wow, Talk about "not being able to please everybody"!   :)   In all seriousness, Having anonymous decks is WAYYYYY better!  I disagree with your statement: "The decks in this game are all made to be strong against certain decks and weak against others."    The decks are Made for variety, first and foremost, balance issues are tweaked later.  The fact that certain decks have Terrible match-ups, whereas others are more well-rounded, is just simply the way magic is and has always been.  I personally have found this game to be AMAZINGLY well-balanced (Nothing like the Vampires of the first game)!   As for Lilliana's discard deck: This deck is by no means overpowered.  The fact that you see it quite often is more due to the expansion just recently being released coupled with the fact that Discard archetypes have always been extremely popular in Magic.  Once the "newness" wears off a little, you should start seeing a little more variety again.

ok, I will play Jace and you play U/G. Lets play 100 games and you tell me the decks are balanced, lol. If you think the decks are balanced then I probably couldn't persuade you otherwise anyway, so I won't even try to go there. Discard should prove to be stronger against Jace and Burn than most of the other decks have been, which is why it is being used a lot. I personally like the game before the game when people try to pick a good deck combination by switching around. It's great if you are smart enough to know what each deck is strong and weak against. If you aren't, the anonymous deck thing is a copout supporting ignorance. Not calling you ignorant at all because I know you understand the decks, but in general. Takes some of the fun out of it, especially since U/G is my favorite deck to play, but Jace and Vamps absolutely destroy it if things go as they should. I'm sure discard would work well against U/G too so either I care about rank or I play U/G and hope I don't go up against 3 of the most popular decks. In my opinion, it absolutely takes several decks completely off the table for fear of a terrible matchup. And you have to admit that playing Jace or Burn gives you a much better chance all around than say playing big green, which only works against slow decks. Sometimes :P


ps- and discard has always been popular because it works against so many different deck types. One of my all time personal favorites going back to Hymn/Hippie.

You should re-read what I wrote because I think it went right over your head.  I don't need to play 100 games of a bad match-up to know that bad match-ups exist.  I stated in my comment that they DO exist. Just because Every single deck isn't an exact  50-50 against every other deck does not mean the game has balance issues.   It's been like that in just about every Magic Format for years!  Yes,  You are absolutely correct that some variety will be lost with the anonymous decks. The better decks will be played more often and decks like Sarkhan and Koth will get played even less often.  But it won't be that bad. Not like last game where over 1/2 the people played Vampires ALL THE TIME.  What you are experiencing now is Everyone playing the NEW decks because they are fresh and new. The expansion hasn't even been out for 2 weeks for Pete's sake!  I personally run into G/W  just as much as Discard, and that deck SUX! So what does that tell you?    And as far as Discard goes,  I've been playing Jace and I beat Lilliana about 90% of the time,  So I hope you weren't alluding to that being a bad match-up.  

As for Kiora,  If that is your favorite deck then I can totally see why you would have liked it better before.  Kiora is Really going to suck even more now, as it does lose to a bunch of Good decks that will see some more play. But in fairness, U/G was never that great to begin to with. I've been saying that all along.  It ALWAYS lost to Jace and Vampires, nothing new there. So it's one thing to say, "I don't like the anonymous deck change because it prevents me from avoiding unfavorable match-ups with my favorite deck"  It's a completed different thing to claim that there are balance issues.  Again, Just to reiterate - Just because there are good and bad match-ups does not mean that the game "as a whole" is "unbalanced".  I hope that clears up the confusion, Or if you prefer we could just play 100 random deck matches, see who wins more and assume that That person knows more about what they are talking about! :)

Balance cannot exist without a comparable opposite. So if you mean the decks are balanced in that you have pretty stellar decks on one end of the spectrum like Jace or Burn, and absolutely terrible decks on the other end of the spectrum like Koth or Dragons, then yes, I suppose there is a balance in the game. If you were trying to say that even though some decks have a few bad matchups and other decks have almost all bad matchups that the decks themselves are balanced in that they have a good chance of winning based on a random matchup, then you need to check the dictionary. A deck that has weaknesses against 80% of the other decks is not nearly as balanced as a deck that has weaknesses against 30% of the other decks. As people further realize this and have no ability to make sure those "bad matchup yet balanced" decks can't be used in a less unfavorable matchup, they will get kicked to the curb. I honestly cannot understand how on one hand you say that a deck like U/G always loses to Jace, yet the decks are balanced, unless like I just said, you are referring to a more taoist interpretation of the word. Sorry.

U/G loses badly to Jace-  But it beats the HELL out of Garruk!   That's a comparable opposite.  Some decks are more rounded and some have complete blow-outs and weaknesses.  But "For The Most Part" the game is well balanced.  You can go ahead and throw out arbitrary, unverifiable percentages.  I'm not going to argue it to death.  If you still feel it's a problem- go play unranked.  We'll just agree to disagree. No harm, no foul.  I usually win the vast majority of games I play, bad match-ups and all, so I simply don't see it.

unverifiable percentages eh? In one post you said you always lost to Jace as U/G then in another post you say you win the vast majority of games bad matchup or not. Sorry, but that really made me LOL :P

and your analogy fits well to my point. U/G does destroy Apex almost as much as it gets destroyed by Jace, Vamps, etc. The strategic element to all of this is knowing when to play U/G and when not to play U/G. Now that everything is anonymous, the strategy of the pregame is completely taken out. It's like half the game went away. And I will use this as my final example before we agree to disagree, which I think is best. I do like to play U/G. Every now and then in ranked play someone would show up Apex and I could squeeze in a game here and there with U/G. Now that it is anonymous and I am not clairvoyant, I cannot predict the rare times Apex will pop up, so I have to remove U/G completely as an option and go with something more well rounded and able to compete with all the fast decks that pop up far more frequently. So if the idea of going anonymous was to increase variety, it isn't working as intended, because I am now decreasing my variety as a direct result of anonymous decks. And I know I'm not the only person who took a stats class in college and can figure this out.

State Championships are coming up next month.  Perhaps you should call your local store and tell them that you'll play if they provide you a list of what everyone else will be playing so you can properly prepare. :)

G/W doesn't suck.  It requires some serious tightening of its build, aggressive mulliganing, and a competent pilot.  But it's easily one of the most explosive decks available now.  I've had several turn 4 kills off an unanswered Spiritdancer now.

G/W is very unreliable. The main reason is it has no answer to anything any other deck does. Same problem with Apex. No creature control, no way to stall the other player, no way to change your playstyle to what is happening. The fact that you are touting spiritdancer as the best part of the deck surprises me. So easy to kill. Better off building up the ledgewalker or the fox. Still, too unreliable and there's no way to adjust. You have to get one of 3 creatures, get an aura or 2, and hope they don't have any creature removal. Goes bust too much. Fun to play though.

@poo  cute post. However, we both know that if you walk into any legitimate tournament and you don't already know and have playtested against 90% of the decks you will see there, you deserve to be bounced in round 2. :)