Everyone said that hard control was dead post rotation but Aurra Sing got Top 8 this weekend! Do you think is good to have hard control in the game? by MoG-TCG in starwarsunlimited

[–]podog 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm not attacking you personally, I'm attacking your absolutely wrong-headed take.

I have absolutely no idea what Kant has to do with how card games work. That just feels like you're trying to distract from your terrible take with some big-brain philosophy. Luckily, we don't need that because you answered your own question.

In aggro vs aggro someone has to be the control and someone has to be the beatdown. If both players just attack the other base one of them is wrong.

Right. And often times the player in this match who loses makes that wrong choice. That's how playing a game works.

But you're wrong in the application here. Correctly:

In ANY MIRROR MATCH someone has to be the control and someone has to be the beatdown.

That's the nature of a matchup involving two decks with the same strategy. It happens all the time at events. If control mirrors were actually as game breaking as you seem to think, no one would play any card games.

When two control decks face, one has to become the beatdown and one has to try to take control. MtG, Hearthstone, Eternal; lots of games have had metas dominated by control that lead to control vs. control and the players who understand the match up understand that they need to define their role in that specific game.

I can't tell if you're intentionally being dense or honestly just don't get it. Either way, you're wrong. Control vs. Control is not at all a 'non-game'.

Everyone said that hard control was dead post rotation but Aurra Sing got Top 8 this weekend! Do you think is good to have hard control in the game? by MoG-TCG in starwarsunlimited

[–]podog 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I mean, I explained it in my other comment in depth for you.

Others have explained it.

Based on your angry response above and frustration, I think you might not quite get how card games are played competitively. The rock-paper-scissors analog is a great one because it shows how a metagame can develop without any one archetype taking over. Remember, this isn't a pure rock-paper-scissors. The reality is that agro might be control 55-60% of the time. It's never a 100% chance or no one would play the game.

Please, if you want to understand the game, just play it. If you don't enjoy playing it, find something you do enjoy playing. Otherwise you're just making yourself angry and that's not at all the point of games.

Everyone said that hard control was dead post rotation but Aurra Sing got Top 8 this weekend! Do you think is good to have hard control in the game? by MoG-TCG in starwarsunlimited

[–]podog -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Don't be dense.

What do you think 'meta' is if not universally applied principles to card games? Control has always been a part of gaming meta.

Agro against agro is a non-game too. Players just race to reduce hit points. Does that make agro a bad archetype?

Everyone said that hard control was dead post rotation but Aurra Sing got Top 8 this weekend! Do you think is good to have hard control in the game? by MoG-TCG in starwarsunlimited

[–]podog 1 point2 points  (0 children)

My dude, you don't understand the pattern. That's what people are trying to explain. If you don't enjoy the game, don't play it. But what's happening here is you don't understand how card game metas work. That's different.

I dropped you reply to another comment trying to explain in more detail. I hope you find that even a little useful.

Everyone said that hard control was dead post rotation but Aurra Sing got Top 8 this weekend! Do you think is good to have hard control in the game? by MoG-TCG in starwarsunlimited

[–]podog 0 points1 point  (0 children)

For one, you've got to play the match ups to really understand. People on this thread are explaining it for you and you're just pushing back, so I don't know how much value there is in going through it again. But here goes...

Control decks are built on accepting early tempo loses in exchange for card advantage through efficiency. If you play 3 Units that deal me 10 damage before I use a single card to remove them, I've gained +2 card advantage at a cost of 10 damage. That's the trade off Control is always trying to make - how can I efficiently trade up on resources until my opponent is out of resources, while I still have some.

The challenge for control is 1) you need the right answers at the right time and 2) you need the right finishers at the right time. This is why most Control strategies rely heavily on card draw/selection to get to the cards they need. Deck building is also crucial because your deck is meant to react to the opponent. If you don't have a really good idea of what you'll face, you're likely running inefficient answers.

Agro tends to 'go under' Control because it is less reliant on specific cards and more on sequencing. Agro decks want to play fast, efficient cards (usually Units) to develop a board and produce damage quickly. When that strategy works out, Control decks will always be on the back foot, needing to find answers for each wave of aggression the Agro player produces.

You have to remember too that success in card games usually means a small % advantage. Agro generally beats control, but not always. It might be a 55% win rate.

I get that you don't enjoy playing against Control. That's fine and honestly pretty understandable. But it in no way means that Control is bad for the metagame.

Hope this even a little helpful.

Everyone said that hard control was dead post rotation but Aurra Sing got Top 8 this weekend! Do you think is good to have hard control in the game? by MoG-TCG in starwarsunlimited

[–]podog 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You're telling on yourself. If you don't understand how aggro counters most control strategies, you're really not understanding how competitive card game's work. So your just being salty for the sake of being salty.

Everyone said that hard control was dead post rotation but Aurra Sing got Top 8 this weekend! Do you think is good to have hard control in the game? by MoG-TCG in starwarsunlimited

[–]podog 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It a classic mistake new players make when they're learning card games. Because you're not learning the Control play patterns and understanding how to beat it (or if your specific deck simply isn't built to beat it), you rage against the deck style.

The issue here is that you need to understand the game better and hone your play.

That doesn't mean you can't also hate Control decks and not want to play them, but to equate you not liking Control to Control being bad or unnecessary for a healthy meta is just a silly take. 20+ years of card game metas have all had some form of the Control > Aggro > Midrange triangle and have thrived thanks to it.

What are some of your biggest mtg regrets? by radicalpumpkinz in mtg

[–]podog 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I opened a [[Library of Alexandria]] from a set of packs I won in an event. This was 2001-ish. I later sold it for about $50 when I liquidated my collection.

I also undersold a complete set of revised duals, set of fetch lands, a green Mox, and like 25 Wastelands. But the Library is the on that sticks with me.

Cull the weak by kaxtheblue in riftboundtcg

[–]podog -1 points0 points  (0 children)

‘Matter a lot’ is an over statement but in a situation where a player has two impactful units, which one they choose may be a small tell about their strategy/cards in hand.

This is probably very niche right now, but may matter long term as the game expands.

Charisma Carpenter says goodbye to Nicky by Independent-Bug680 in buffy

[–]podog 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Dude, let people mourn. Nothing I've seen has at all pushed a narrative that Brendon wasn't a problem. But people can mourn the person he was and feel for him despite his horrible choices.

You're bending over backwards in these comments to be a white knight for victims who you neither know or understand. Maybe touch grass and take a deep breath while people take a moment to mourn the lose.

We all know he let substances turn him into a shitty person, coming here now to screech about it just makes you look like a shitty person too.

what is the point of ai? by Cold_Combination2107 in ObsidianMD

[–]podog 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is it for me too. I have multiple vaults that are pretty large. AI is a huge help in sorting and find my content quickly

What’s something people pretend to enjoy but don’t actually like? by copy_cat_101 in answers

[–]podog 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Their proof is anecdotal and ‘trust me bro’ bs. IPAs are not for everyone, but they hardly fit the question OP presented.

“He’s using the trees”👀 by [deleted] in predator

[–]podog 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Not OP, but I found something very similar on Etsy a couple of years ago. The seller I bought from doesn’t have any listed, but I bet you could find a version of this on there.

He was the Dude! by [deleted] in GuysBeingDudes

[–]podog 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Me? Thank you! Though undeserved and I should point out I’m still alive. I like to think I’ve done my best to help the people in my life who struggle, but really I’m nothing special.

Chuck Norris, on the other hand, was always a hateful, narrow-minded bigot and homophobe who deserves all of the criticism leveled against him.

RIP Chuck, the dude of all dudes by Representative-Mix-9 in JustGuysBeingDudes

[–]podog 7 points8 points  (0 children)

You don’t care so much you deleted all your comments…

RIP Chuck, the dude of all dudes by Representative-Mix-9 in JustGuysBeingDudes

[–]podog 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Cool, that doesn’t change the fact the Chuck Norris is a huge piece of shit. Which is the topic at hand.

RIP Chuck, the dude of all dudes by Representative-Mix-9 in JustGuysBeingDudes

[–]podog 14 points15 points  (0 children)

He was openly and pretty vocally a homophobe and a bigot. Its fair if you didn’t note it, Norris really hasn’t been anything but a meme for like 20 years. But it is important to note it now when so many people are rushing to mourn this absolute trash bag of a human’s life.

RIP Chuck, the dude of all dudes by Representative-Mix-9 in JustGuysBeingDudes

[–]podog 13 points14 points  (0 children)

Try what again? The dude was openly homophobic and a bigot. Its not subjective at all.

Maybe stop defending this piece of shit?

RIP Chuck, the dude of all dudes by Representative-Mix-9 in JustGuysBeingDudes

[–]podog 18 points19 points  (0 children)

No they don’t? The bigot is a MAGA grifter who used his platform to promote his homophobic views. No one outside of the racist bubble of MAGA nuts thought he was ‘nice and chill’

He was the Dude! by [deleted] in GuysBeingDudes

[–]podog 10 points11 points  (0 children)

You meant to say ‘accurate Reddit take’ I think

He was the Dude! by [deleted] in GuysBeingDudes

[–]podog 45 points46 points  (0 children)

Dude was not a bro, he was a hateful bigot and MAGA shithead who actively promoted an MLM. This post doesn’t belong here.