I may have come off as condescending to immaturity, and to be certain I am in fact being condescending towards immaturity and childish reactions. I don't apologize for it either. Weenie whining, rage quitting, refusal to adapt etc are poor attitudes, lack sportmanship and good conduct and is generally negative. I'm not controlling them, saying they can't act in said manner, or whatever but what I can control is my own personal decision to not interact with those kinds of players.
Honestly, I don't see how any negative, consistently poor mannered and poor attitude players manage to compete in anything.
No, it really wouldn't. The argument is based on dismissing the other player's goals and reasons for playing. Of course, without the other player, you don't have a game. Repeating a bad argument doesn't magically turn it into a good one, no matter how many people repeat it.
And how many posts complain about "mindless turn guys sideways" already? I see them every day.
You either missed the point or are intentionally ignoring it. You tried to claim that if players with counterspells and discard complain about aggressive creature decks and refuse to adapt, they are being immature. So what? THAT DOESN'T HAPPEN. Most control deck players try to pack answers for those creatures. Combo decks try to pack answers to hate or out speed them. It is more often than not the aggro or midrange player who responds with "I don't like combo, counterspells, or discard, I'm not playing against you." There is a difference between complaining about the amount of turn dudes sideways strategies, yet planning for them, and complaining about spells, yet not doing a thing about them.
Never made that claim, nice strawman though. I made the same argument Elminster did, against a completely different style of deck to point out that the argument is flawed at the core. Attack the argument, not the poster, and the argument that a person's goals for playing can be dismissed is a bad one. The argument that people who aren't playing competitive decks are scrubs who deserve to lose every game leads directly to them not having fun, not playing anymore, and then fewer people playing.
Also note: I keep mentioning that I'm talking about casual. When in a tournament setting, I do everything in my power to win, and expect my opponents to do likewise. In competitive play, you should always expect disruption, speed, efficiency, and a certain ruthless style of play. It's competitive, and anyone who dislikes that style shouldn't be competing. I just think that when you take that same mindset outside of actual competitive-level play, you need to find others who are in the same mindset.
As a personal example, I play casually against my neice and my brother. Neither are great players, and although I could play mono-black devotion or WU control against them, it would lead to mismatched games where they constantly lose. Why should they bother playing if they know they'll lose for weeks, months, or years before they catch up? So I play stupid decks, ones that try to do something strange. Another friend of mine, though, we play serious. We build the best decks we can and try our level best to beat each other in competitive mindsets. Both ways to play are valid, and both lead to enjoyable games. The goals of the players involved are different, and by playing against people with the same goals, you keep things fun for everyone.
Dismissing what some people consider unfun as "whining" and saying you refuse to respect or even tolerate those opinions is narrow-minded and intentionally disrespectful of others. Aside from thtat, it ensures that one's own preferred playstyle becomes the only way to play. There's nothing mature about Stop Having Fun Guys. (Warning- tvtropes link)
Private Mod Note
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Cards are game pieces, and should be treated as such, easily replaceable.
Cards are not money, investments, or a retirement fund, and should never have been treated as such.
Wizards made a mistake caving to speculators once, and we still pay for that mistake 2 decades later.
"Entitled:" the entire ad hominem fallacy condensed into a single word. It doesn't strengthen your argument to attack motivations, it just makes you look like you don't understand the argument.
I do not like whiny players simply put. Sadly, whiny players also tend to (though though not necessarily) have accompanying attitudes like entitlement, rage quitting, poor sportsmanship and generally can be negative. I am not trying to enforce anyone to anything. I just don't bother with players that rage, whine and have sucky attitudes. If you want to play with those players, by all means do so.
I do not disrespect players who want to whine and carry on and complain, I just choose not to associate with them because I find it pointless.
In a competitive playing environment, I have to simply play and move on. I don't think I am wrong, or disrespectful to ask players to be courteous at the least.
Just now I played against someone playing Mono-Black with my UW Control deck and he also got really mad in the chat after he couldnt break through my defenses.
I just dont get such behavior really. Before that game I played against someone who rode two Mistcutter Hydras to victory because I didnt draw anything relevant besides counterspells but I didnt complain about that either how unfair it is that I can't counter those Hydras. That's just how it is.
There has been a very noticeable rise in the amount of opponents that will concede the WHOLE MATCH after I win only the first game. This is generally a sign of sour grapes.
You can't read too much into MTGO behaviour. Assuming that people not wanting to play you means there is something wrong with *them* is not the first assumption I would make. They may be quitting the game because:
-they know they have no chance of winning, especially if they are playing some deck they just brewed and you are playing a polished tier one deck; congratulations, you won!
-they may not enjoy playing against you; they are under no obligation to play a match they are not enjoying, any more than I am obligated to watch a TV Movie that's boring, if they flipped the channel because they didn't want to deal with you, then they are making a rational decision in regard to how they spend their free time
-they may have limited time; I often only have a few minutes to play, and to get into a game with someone playing something grindy (or worse, someone who doesn't know how to use the hotkeys), then I'm left with a choice: play part of a slow game, or all of an exciting game
-if your deck is annoying, sometime people just aren't in the mood, sometimes I'll quit after the second mana leak because I'm tired and just don't feel like dealing with it, sometimes I will play it out
-they may have just finished playing a match against another person playing the same deck, I've had this happen a lot, where three people in a row were playing Owling Mine, if you just switched to a popular deck, this might be the case
Put simply, people often play MTGO to relax after a long day at work. This will guide their decisions about what to play.
Private Mod Note
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Things WotC cares about:
-making certain Standard cards can be played in Modern, therefore increasing their value and increasing WotC's profit margin
Things WotC does not care about:
-keeping the ban list as short as possible
-taking chances with an entire format for the benefit of a single card
-catering to play styles that newer players generally don't like and will lose them more players than it will gain
-keeping the meta balanced between archetypes/colors/whatever
-keeping cards on the secondary market cheap (available yes, but not cheap)
-keeping the meta diverse (as long as a single deck doesn't threaten the popularity of the format)
How is this even a serious question?
Just play a non-control- or non-mill-deck and meet a control- or mill-deck and you will experience why decks mainly built around removal spells or mill-abilities are annoying. People liking such decks and laughing about people who dislike them are usually people playing such decks because they're unable to play anything else or put thoughts into deck-building. My experience.
But, anyway, such deck-mechanics are annoying for the following reasons:
1) Creatures dying from their controller taking a certain action and creatures dying from something their controller couldn't do much about are different things which will make a player feel more or less satisfied. You lumping "creatures dying" together speaks of little understanding of why humans experience things as fun or not.
2) They don't require any kind of skill. Well, mill-decks do require some sort of skill (which the average mill-deck-player doesn't have which is why you beat them so easily with a somewhat decent deck). Control-decks don't require anything, though. Except playing out one dull removal card after the other. It's basically on the same level as kicking a smaller child just because you can.
3) You, as their opponent, don't have fun and you can't even do anything about it and neither is it your fault. You didn't do misplays, you just waste your time waiting and looking at the other person having fun through being in charge. It's something most people don't like doing. Sitting around, watching others have fun while they don't get a chance to have fun themselves (which is what MTG is about).