Serious question. You sit down with your decks, ready to play a game, and then just turn dudes sideways for 5 minutes and the game is over. How is that fun? Really? Don't you want to actually play a longer interactive game? Whats the point of having a deck where the game is just gonna end in 5 minutes or less? A deck that requires minimal thinking or strategy, where all you do is play creatures, turn them sideways, and maybe aim a burn spell at a blocker, or the dome.
And another thing, these same aggro players complain about non-interactive combo (not taking sides on that issue) being so boring, because all the combo player did was draw cards and combo off. How is that any different from your creature deck? You're just as much at fault for not interacting with them as they are with you.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Thanks to Rivenor for the signature and XenoNinja for the Avi!
Maybe the decks are harder to play than you think?
Except I've played plenty of aggro decks, and they aren't. Unless MTG is full of idiots, which tbh wouldn't surprise me, as most of the worlds population is downright dumb.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Thanks to Rivenor for the signature and XenoNinja for the Avi!
Aggro isn't mindless. You have to have an excellent understanding of combat and how not to overextend to avoid playing into a board wipe.
You can simplify any archetype to where it sounds mindless.
"Control is so mindless, all you do is counter people's spells and destroy their stuff"
"Combo is so mindless, all you do is play combo pieces and win"
"EDH is so mindless, all you do is play terrible cards and complain when someone does something effective"
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
These days, some wizards are finding they have a little too much deck left at the end of their $$$.
MTG finance guy- follow me on Twitter@RichArschmann or RichardArschmann on Reddit
Except I've played plenty of aggro decks, and they aren't. Unless MTG is full of idiots, which tbh wouldn't surprise me, as most of the worlds population is downright dumb.
Let's stop and think for a second here. If you play these decks perfectly, why don't you go and win GPs and SCG Opens with them? Lots of pros take these decks and do significantly better than average players, which doesn't make much sense if there is no skill involved in playing the deck.
Aggro is mindless. Combat is not difficult to understand in the least. Its ****ing creatures smashing, and playing around double blockers or tricks. How not to over extend against control? IDK maybe land two threats and just attack until they are dealt with? Yeah not hard at all.
Let's stop and think for a second here. If you play these decks perfectly, why don't you go and win GPs and SCG Opens with them? Lots of pros take these decks and do significantly better than average players, which doesn't make much sense if there is no skill involved in playing the deck.
Because A) I don't enjoy playing aggro in any way shape or form, and B) because most combo and midrange stomps aggro, anc considering I only play Modern, that format is basically midrange v combo where aggro is just not vaible, and C) I'm not gonna go out and buy a deck that I hate playing.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Thanks to Rivenor for the signature and XenoNinja for the Avi!
IMO pretty much every deck IS mindless, unless you have a whole boatload of ridiculously branched decision points. Examples
- Most tutors, although only really if they're in a non-insta-combo deck, because if they are, it's just a route to one card, not a decision.
- Things like Necrotic Ooze - usually you will have intentionally populated your grave with useful stuff, but still, a card that has like 18 abilities on it has a lot of tough decisions to be made.
- Things like Dominating Licid or simic manipulator - straightforward card itself, but its whole point is to steal other people's stuff, and then you have to use that stuff effectively. You can't plan for that fully / it involves re-imagining your deck on the fly.
- The most common type of card that is almost always non-mindless and actually used competitively is stuff like thoughtseize, have to size up an opponent's probable deck composition and strategy on the fly.
Pros will do slightly better with the same deck than you, even if it doesn't have any cards like these, due to rare, isolated tough decision points, yes, but that doesn't make the whole experience all that much more mindless.
Instead, I believe the majority of the skill in magic (outside of high end competition) is deck building, more so than playing. And building a good aggro deck is no easier than any other deck.
This feels like a troll thread. Was that your intent, op?
As far as serious answers go, figuring the combat math and playing through your opponent's strategy to grab wins is pretty beastmode.
It's like rushdown strategies in fighting games or zerging in an RTS, overwhelming a target quickly and effectively is fun sometimes, and actually requires more skill than you'd think before trying it.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
“Tell me who you walk with, and I'll tell you who you are.” Esmeralda Santiago Art is life itself.
Whats the point of a game where two people are smashing creatures at each other and ends in less than 5 minutes? If your attention span is that ****ty you should consider a different hobby. Control actually does take thought to pilot. Aggro, I've never played an aggro deck where I had to make actual, game changing decisions. "Lets see, this is so difficult, should I attack with my creatures? Hmm, I have creatures and he doesn't...damn I DON'T KNOW WHAT TO DO HERE!!!!"
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Thanks to Rivenor for the signature and XenoNinja for the Avi!
Okay well if you're just gonna start swearing a bunch more instead of responding to what other people actually answered with, then there's not much point here. You want there to be greater attention spans in Magic -- start by setting a good example in this thread...
Serious question. You sit down with your decks, ready to play a game, and then just counter spells for 50 minutes and the game is over. How is that fun? Really? Don't you want to actually play a shorter interactive game? Whats the point of having a deck where the game is just gonna end in 50 minutes or more? A deck that requires minimal thinking or strategy, where all you do is counter spells, and maybe aim a removal spell at a resolved threat, or play an occasional win-con.
And another thing, these same control players complain about non-interactive aggro (not taking sides on that issue) being so boring, because all the aggro player did was attack you with creatures. How is that any different from your counter deck? You're just as much at fault for not interacting with them as they are with you.
---------
I know that you might be thinking that that's a gross oversimplification of how control is played, But then again, anything that follows that form is probably an oversimplification, regardless of what play-style it's about.
Whats the point of a game where two people are smashing creatures at each other and ends in less than 5 minutes? If your attention span is that ****ty you should consider a different hobby. Control actually does take thought to pilot. Aggro, I've never played an aggro deck where I had to make actual, game changing decisions. "Lets see, this is so difficult, should I attack with my creatures? Hmm, I have creatures and he doesn't...damn I DON'T KNOW WHAT TO DO HERE!!!!"
I'm speechless.
I have no words to explain to you how dumb this statement is.
Aggro is mindless. Combat is not difficult to understand in the least. Its ****ing creatures smashing, and playing around double blockers or tricks. How not to over extend against control? IDK maybe land two threats and just attack until they are dealt with? Yeah not hard at all.
Aggro is tough for many reasons. A lot of top players consider it to be more challenging than midrange or control decks. I guess at a low level, like FNM, it's tough for bad and midlevel players to play control adequately. But midlevel PTQ players understand control and can play it fine.
Understanding aggro on the other hand, is a different ball game. Sure, it's easy to play creatures and attack, but there are tons of more decisions to make than that. Deckbuilding aside, (though that's half the battle) each decision made is far more important. Mulligans are tougher, and mean a lot more. Knowing when to play aggressively and when to save creatures to block is very important against other aggro decks. Knowing how far to extend against control is tough too. Sometimes you're far enough behind that you accept the fact that you can't beat a sweeper so you go all in, and sometimes you have to decide to go in enough that you're dead to Detention Sphere but not Verdict. You have to choose when to attack walkers and when to attack the opponent. You need to understand the speed of a game, so that you know when to throw burn at the face, when to attack into bigger creatures, and when to sit back and pass the turn. Sideboarding is tough too. You need to go on the offensive in some matchups, and on the defensive in others. Sometimes you need to side into being grindy, and sometimes it's siding into an all-in beatdown deck. Often by turn 3, you want to be planning out as many possible situations as you can, based off of the cards in hand, cards in your deck, and cards that your opponent could play.
Because A) I don't enjoy playing aggro in any way shape or form, and B) because most combo and midrange stomps aggro, anc considering I only play Modern, that format is basically midrange v combo where aggro is just not vaible, and C) I'm not gonna go out and buy a deck that I hate playing.
Good excuses. It seems like you'd be able to drop $200 on a deck and get it back really easily, considering that in Standard you can play a top tier aggro deck and go top 8 major events, since you would play it so perfectly.
Whats the point of a game where two people are killing each other's creatures nothing relevant happens for 30 minutes? If your idea of fun is to bore your opponent to death you should consider a different hobby. Aggro actually does take thought to pilot. Control, I've never played a control deck where I had to make actual, game changing decisions. "Lets see, this is so difficult, should I kill his creatures or draw cards? Hmm, I'll die if I don't play my removal now...damn I DON'T KNOW WHAT TO DO HERE!!!!"
Whats the point of a game where two people are smashing creatures at each other and ends in less than 5 minutes? If your attention span is that ****ty you should consider a different hobby. Control actually does take thought to pilot. Aggro, I've never played an aggro deck where I had to make actual, game changing decisions. "Lets see, this is so difficult, should I attack with my creatures? Hmm, I have creatures and he doesn't...damn I DON'T KNOW WHAT TO DO HERE!!!!"
Nobody likes to lose however crying about it here won't help.
Regardless of what others said, I play aggro cos its fast and requires less brain juices.
Control: After 8 turns and the board still looks like in Turn 1 with the expectations of lands?
Combo: Mostly dead but its fun to draw attention to myself as opponents take out my combo pieces. I like being naughty and attention-seeking at times.
Knowing what to counter and what to remove, when to tap out for a sweeper or a walker, or a sorcery speet removal spells, when to kill something vs when to cast that card advantage spell, these all require actual thought, real decisions. Aggro is incredibly simple to pilot.
Where is the fun in a 45 minute control game? The mind games, knowing when to risk tapping out vs holding up a response to the potential opposing threat, knowing full well that if you tap out, they could cast a huge draw spell end of your turn, and land an even bigger threat than yours, OR they have nothing. Again knowing what to counter and what counterspells to use vs when to use your removal, and how to use it effectively. Etc.
And Gerefi, I'll be blunt, I don't have $200 or whatever to drop on a new deck, let alone one that I don't enjoy.
Regardless of what others said, I play aggro cos its fast and requires less brain juices.
Control: After 8 turns and the board still looks like in Turn 1 with the expectations of lands?
Thank you for actually agreeing with me.
As for the 2nd part, IMO that is the most beautiful sight in the world: Empty board except for a pile of lands.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Thanks to Rivenor for the signature and XenoNinja for the Avi!
As for the 2nd part, IMO that is the most beautiful sight in the world: Empty board except for a pile of lands.
I prefer the opposite: a board full of everything but lands.
At the OP: Aggro isn't that mindless. Apart from understanding combat, you have to know
a) when to attack
b) when to cast creatures
c) how to respond to things when they happen(ex, your blocker just got pathed, do you keep your mana open so that you can bolt their threat or do you cast a creature and run out of mana so that you can block, kill their blocker, and stay with a blocker to swing with next turn?)
And, as you have mentioned in the OP, aggro is fast. It's arguably one of the fastest and most reliable decks IMO. The deck doesn't lose if something is out of place/removed(combo), and it doesn't require you to survive the early game to win(control). And it's fun IMO
Knowing what to counter and what to remove, when to tap out for a sweeper or a walker, or a sorcery speet removal spells, when to kill something vs when to cast that card advantage spell, these all require actual thought, real decisions. Aggro is incredibly simple to pilot.
Where is the fun in a 45 minute control game? The mind games, knowing when to risk tapping out vs holding up a response to the potential opposing threat, knowing full well that if you tap out, they could cast a huge draw spell end of your turn, and land an even bigger threat than yours, OR they have nothing. Again knowing what to counter and what counterspells to use vs when to use your removal, and how to use it effectively. Etc.
And Gerefi, I'll be blunt, I don't have $200 or whatever to drop on a new deck, let alone one that I don't enjoy.
Thank you for actually agreeing with me.
As for the 2nd part, IMO that is the most beautiful sight in the world: Empty board except for a pile of lands.
Feeding the troll here, but each archetype is fairly simple against the opposite. Control vs. aggro there aren't a lot of tough decisions. "hmm, do I cast supreme verdict now, so I don't die next turn? Yeah, I think I will."
OP has never had to try to figure out a crowded board state in an aggro v aggro matchup, especially with both players at low life, and the numerous combat tricks that abound in current aggro decks. How many guys to attack with how many do I need to leave for the backswing, when it is right to chump vs. race, is it right to use removal to get in damage now, vs saving it for a potentially bigger guy that you can't deal with later, etc.
Just as you list several intricacies of the control vs. control matchup, I say the aggro v aggro matchup has just as many, if not more. And if you pick the wrong line, in aggro v. aggro you get punished immediately.
I never understood OP's line of thinking. When piloting an aggro deck, sure, maybe you have less lines you can take at any given time (in comparison to control) but you still have to have a deep understanding of the meta to pilot aggro effectively at larger events. If it was "mindless" then it would be just as easily countered.
Learning and respecting every possible archetype goes a long way in simply making you a better player. Whenever you hear/read someone whine about a specific archetype that's a surefire sign that said player is likely very bad at magic.
Serious question. You sit down with your decks, ready to play a game, and then just turn dudes sideways for 5 minutes and the game is over. How is that fun? Really? Don't you want to actually play a longer interactive game? Whats the point of having a deck where the game is just gonna end in 5 minutes or less? A deck that requires minimal thinking or strategy, where all you do is play creatures, turn them sideways, and maybe aim a burn spell at a blocker, or the dome.
And another thing, these same aggro players complain about non-interactive combo (not taking sides on that issue) being so boring, because all the combo player did was draw cards and combo off. How is that any different from your creature deck? You're just as much at fault for not interacting with them as they are with you.
TLDR: OP just lost several games to Aggro decks.
Different strokes for different folks, really. I have decks of all types, and depending on my mood I enjoy some more than others. This is a terrible start to the thread, btw. If you want discussion, calm down.
While I disagree with most of this, there is one case where I think this is correct. Burn is designed to be as noninteractive as possible. It doesn't play many creatures, it doesn't interact with the stack, it doesn't interact with the hand. All that it does is deal damage to the opponent off of the stack except for when it will lose if it doesn't kill a creature. It just seems like the most boring and mindless deck of all time. I get creature-based aggro. But I don't understand Burn.
I don't think I'm bad at magic. I just don't get aggro players. My point is I just don't understand how its fun. I'll never understand I guess.
And okay, points made to the contrary/anti-control argument, but we all have our opinions. I do get that people don't find control fun to play, I just don't understand why...
One last point i believe gerefi brought up, deckbuilding is indeed a truly skilltesting exercise, unfortunately one lost on many players, due to the rise of netdecking. Nothing against netdecking, but i had to get that out, cuz a few posters brought up the deck building point.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Thanks to Rivenor for the signature and XenoNinja for the Avi!
And another thing, these same aggro players complain about non-interactive combo (not taking sides on that issue) being so boring, because all the combo player did was draw cards and combo off. How is that any different from your creature deck? You're just as much at fault for not interacting with them as they are with you.
Thanks to Rivenor for the signature and XenoNinja for the Avi!
Quotes:
You can find me on MTGO. My username is gereffi.
Except I've played plenty of aggro decks, and they aren't. Unless MTG is full of idiots, which tbh wouldn't surprise me, as most of the worlds population is downright dumb.
Thanks to Rivenor for the signature and XenoNinja for the Avi!
Quotes:
You can simplify any archetype to where it sounds mindless.
"Control is so mindless, all you do is counter people's spells and destroy their stuff"
"Combo is so mindless, all you do is play combo pieces and win"
"EDH is so mindless, all you do is play terrible cards and complain when someone does something effective"
MTG finance guy- follow me on Twitter@RichArschmann or RichardArschmann on Reddit
Let's stop and think for a second here. If you play these decks perfectly, why don't you go and win GPs and SCG Opens with them? Lots of pros take these decks and do significantly better than average players, which doesn't make much sense if there is no skill involved in playing the deck.
You can find me on MTGO. My username is gereffi.
Casual
RGBeatz | BPauper MBC | 0Cheeri0s | BVampires
Competitive
RBurn | GWMaverick | WURPatriot | BWGJunkBlade | BPOX
Because A) I don't enjoy playing aggro in any way shape or form, and B) because most combo and midrange stomps aggro, anc considering I only play Modern, that format is basically midrange v combo where aggro is just not vaible, and C) I'm not gonna go out and buy a deck that I hate playing.
Thanks to Rivenor for the signature and XenoNinja for the Avi!
Quotes:
- Most tutors, although only really if they're in a non-insta-combo deck, because if they are, it's just a route to one card, not a decision.
- Things like Necrotic Ooze - usually you will have intentionally populated your grave with useful stuff, but still, a card that has like 18 abilities on it has a lot of tough decisions to be made.
- Things like Dominating Licid or simic manipulator - straightforward card itself, but its whole point is to steal other people's stuff, and then you have to use that stuff effectively. You can't plan for that fully / it involves re-imagining your deck on the fly.
- The most common type of card that is almost always non-mindless and actually used competitively is stuff like thoughtseize, have to size up an opponent's probable deck composition and strategy on the fly.
Pros will do slightly better with the same deck than you, even if it doesn't have any cards like these, due to rare, isolated tough decision points, yes, but that doesn't make the whole experience all that much more mindless.
Instead, I believe the majority of the skill in magic (outside of high end competition) is deck building, more so than playing. And building a good aggro deck is no easier than any other deck.
Which is one way to address the OP.
As far as serious answers go, figuring the combat math and playing through your opponent's strategy to grab wins is pretty beastmode.
It's like rushdown strategies in fighting games or zerging in an RTS, overwhelming a target quickly and effectively is fun sometimes, and actually requires more skill than you'd think before trying it.
Art is life itself.
Thanks to Rivenor for the signature and XenoNinja for the Avi!
Quotes:
And another thing, these same control players complain about non-interactive aggro (not taking sides on that issue) being so boring, because all the aggro player did was attack you with creatures. How is that any different from your counter deck? You're just as much at fault for not interacting with them as they are with you.
---------
I know that you might be thinking that that's a gross oversimplification of how control is played, But then again, anything that follows that form is probably an oversimplification, regardless of what play-style it's about.
I'm speechless.
I have no words to explain to you how dumb this statement is.
Aggro is tough for many reasons. A lot of top players consider it to be more challenging than midrange or control decks. I guess at a low level, like FNM, it's tough for bad and midlevel players to play control adequately. But midlevel PTQ players understand control and can play it fine.
Understanding aggro on the other hand, is a different ball game. Sure, it's easy to play creatures and attack, but there are tons of more decisions to make than that. Deckbuilding aside, (though that's half the battle) each decision made is far more important. Mulligans are tougher, and mean a lot more. Knowing when to play aggressively and when to save creatures to block is very important against other aggro decks. Knowing how far to extend against control is tough too. Sometimes you're far enough behind that you accept the fact that you can't beat a sweeper so you go all in, and sometimes you have to decide to go in enough that you're dead to Detention Sphere but not Verdict. You have to choose when to attack walkers and when to attack the opponent. You need to understand the speed of a game, so that you know when to throw burn at the face, when to attack into bigger creatures, and when to sit back and pass the turn. Sideboarding is tough too. You need to go on the offensive in some matchups, and on the defensive in others. Sometimes you need to side into being grindy, and sometimes it's siding into an all-in beatdown deck. Often by turn 3, you want to be planning out as many possible situations as you can, based off of the cards in hand, cards in your deck, and cards that your opponent could play.
Good excuses. It seems like you'd be able to drop $200 on a deck and get it back really easily, considering that in Standard you can play a top tier aggro deck and go top 8 major events, since you would play it so perfectly.
You can find me on MTGO. My username is gereffi.
Nobody likes to lose however crying about it here won't help.
Control: After 8 turns and the board still looks like in Turn 1 with the expectations of lands?
Combo: Mostly dead but its fun to draw attention to myself as opponents take out my combo pieces. I like being naughty and attention-seeking at times.
Where is the fun in a 45 minute control game? The mind games, knowing when to risk tapping out vs holding up a response to the potential opposing threat, knowing full well that if you tap out, they could cast a huge draw spell end of your turn, and land an even bigger threat than yours, OR they have nothing. Again knowing what to counter and what counterspells to use vs when to use your removal, and how to use it effectively. Etc.
And Gerefi, I'll be blunt, I don't have $200 or whatever to drop on a new deck, let alone one that I don't enjoy.
Thank you for actually agreeing with me.
As for the 2nd part, IMO that is the most beautiful sight in the world: Empty board except for a pile of lands.
Thanks to Rivenor for the signature and XenoNinja for the Avi!
Quotes:
I prefer the opposite: a board full of everything but lands.
At the OP: Aggro isn't that mindless. Apart from understanding combat, you have to know
a) when to attack
b) when to cast creatures
c) how to respond to things when they happen(ex, your blocker just got pathed, do you keep your mana open so that you can bolt their threat or do you cast a creature and run out of mana so that you can block, kill their blocker, and stay with a blocker to swing with next turn?)
And, as you have mentioned in the OP, aggro is fast. It's arguably one of the fastest and most reliable decks IMO. The deck doesn't lose if something is out of place/removed(combo), and it doesn't require you to survive the early game to win(control). And it's fun IMO
Thanks Argentleman;)
WB Teysa token aggroBW (retired)
MAKING (Onmath, Numot, maybe something in Esper)
Feeding the troll here, but each archetype is fairly simple against the opposite. Control vs. aggro there aren't a lot of tough decisions. "hmm, do I cast supreme verdict now, so I don't die next turn? Yeah, I think I will."
OP has never had to try to figure out a crowded board state in an aggro v aggro matchup, especially with both players at low life, and the numerous combat tricks that abound in current aggro decks. How many guys to attack with how many do I need to leave for the backswing, when it is right to chump vs. race, is it right to use removal to get in damage now, vs saving it for a potentially bigger guy that you can't deal with later, etc.
Just as you list several intricacies of the control vs. control matchup, I say the aggro v aggro matchup has just as many, if not more. And if you pick the wrong line, in aggro v. aggro you get punished immediately.
Learning and respecting every possible archetype goes a long way in simply making you a better player. Whenever you hear/read someone whine about a specific archetype that's a surefire sign that said player is likely very bad at magic.
TLDR: OP just lost several games to Aggro decks.
Different strokes for different folks, really. I have decks of all types, and depending on my mood I enjoy some more than others. This is a terrible start to the thread, btw. If you want discussion, calm down.
Storm Crow is strictly worse than Seacoast Drake.
And okay, points made to the contrary/anti-control argument, but we all have our opinions. I do get that people don't find control fun to play, I just don't understand why...
One last point i believe gerefi brought up, deckbuilding is indeed a truly skilltesting exercise, unfortunately one lost on many players, due to the rise of netdecking. Nothing against netdecking, but i had to get that out, cuz a few posters brought up the deck building point.
Thanks to Rivenor for the signature and XenoNinja for the Avi!
Quotes: