This might seem like a weird topic but I need some others opinions by now to discuss the matter on how to solve it.
Basically I have a best friend whom I play MTG with regularly. We have been good friends for quite som time and we meet once a week to throw cards and have a chat. It used to be fine, but there is a clear difference in MTG philosophy between us and now it is starting to show. The problem is that while I build decks as thematic engines, he plays MTG to "beat the resource limit". In practice this means that most my decks spend turn 1-2 on investing in value while he spends the first 3 turns investing heavily in screwing me and up and beating my ass. You know, like a typical modern tournament player.
The problem is I have been trying to talk with him and he is very good at closing the argument before we go anywhere or just pointing the finger back at me saying "well your decks are good too!" but in practice, and we have done the math, he usually wins 75% of the games and sometimes more. And the wins I get are not good wins because he just scoops if he didnt win the first 3-4 turns and thats the point where I finally got my engine going.
So the issue is I feel like he is forcing me to play magic a way that really doesnt suit me. It is weird because some of the most fun matches we have had are with decks he had that were more grindy and down to earth but he seems to want to push the boundaries as much as possible and it usually doesnt take more than a couple of months and then his fun deck has turned into a deck where by turn four he has disrupted my plan, killed my board and gotten me down to 10 health.
I know this is unusual because I have several playgroups and this person he is the only one who leaves me with a sour taste in my mouth when playing MTG.
My question to you guys are, have you experienced anything similar and what was the solution for you? What do you think would be the best?
There's nothing wrong with playing to satisfy a competitive drive. At this point, I'd argue that it is silly to be upset at any level for someone acting the way you know they act for an extended period of time. You want to do "cool stuff" that you find interesting. He is trying to solve a puzzle of efficiency. Nothing wrong with either, but if you are just playing for fun it isn't going to work. Try playing commander, or start a cube, or start a regular draft group. Or, just stop playing with him and continue your friendship without this game. It definitely isn't a necessity.
As someone who plays to win and builds decks accordingly, I know that a lot of people look down on it as some sort of toxic behavior. You sorta indicate that too, claiming he "points the finger back at you" by saying your decks are good. That is a bit silly in my opinion. You are a bit salty about losing, and blaming him for building more efficient decks. Nobody is required to play differently to let you win.
There's nothing wrong with playing to satisfy a competitive drive. At this point, I'd argue that it is silly to be upset at any level for someone acting the way you know they act for an extended period of time. You want to do "cool stuff" that you find interesting. He is trying to solve a puzzle of efficiency. Nothing wrong with either, but if you are just playing for fun it isn't going to work. Try playing commander, or start a cube, or start a regular draft group. Or, just stop playing with him and continue your friendship without this game. It definitely isn't a necessity.
As someone who plays to win and builds decks accordingly, I know that a lot of people look down on it as some sort of toxic behavior. You sorta indicate that too, claiming he "points the finger back at you" by saying your decks are good. That is a bit silly in my opinion. You are a bit salty about losing, and blaming him for building more efficient decks. Nobody is required to play differently to let you win.
Thanks for the answer! Since you seem to have the same mentality as my friend, I think discussing with you is perfect. The main problem is actually that my friend isnt very good at analyzing and discussing it, for him it becomes personal and so his response is usually just "git good". I am very much into feedback so I would love to hear your opinion!
My questions to you are;
(1): What limitations do you set for yourself when deckbuilding? I have argued that if one strives to push the efficiency limits, then eventually one will reach the only barricade that is in the game and that is the format defining framework. E.g if we play casual modern and he keeps pushing the boundary, eventually we will just be playing tier 1 modern.
(2): Does it bother you that, by pushing the limitations of the game and solving the efficiency puzzle, you effectively eliminate more than 90% of all magic cards and end up with a much more predictable pool of cards? Only a select few cards in each new set are modern playable.
(3): I have argued that when the efficiency curve has been pushed as far as possible, the first turn advantage becomes much more apparent. Our statistics show this as well. Is this something you have seen as well, and if so does it bother you at all?
(4): What is your opinion on meta-picking cards versus your friends? My friend has already commented that there are cards he thought about putting in his decks but that they would rarely have an effect versus me specifically and then he put in direct counters instead.
When I play basketball, I just want to have casual conversation in the sun and take cool shots from different places in the court, but my friend wants to block my shots and try to get as many baskets as he can. What should I do?
The problem you describe is not specific to Magic. It can happen with "casual" play of any game, because different people have a different idea of what "casual" means. Some people are just more competitive than others and want to Go for the Throat every time. Others want something relaxed and slower where they can joke around with their friends and not feel too much pressure to be competitive, maybe have the time to set up fun flashy things. You can't force your friend to view the game the same way you do. Both are valid perspectives. He just wants a more competitive version of the game than you do. You're best off finding other players who want to play the game the way you do so you can all equally enjoy it. If your circle of players is limited, you could try changing the format or imposing house rules so your friend can't build as oppressive decks. Modern isn't the only format.
To answer your questions:
(1) Format restrictions. You can also establish your own house rules. Ban cards that are "unfun" to play against. Impose a budget restriction on decks (e.g. $50, $100). Budget is usually what stops kitchen tables from turning into Tier 1. It also poses a different kind of deckbuilding puzzle challenge for competitive types.
(2) No. Most cards are bad. That's part of the puzzle. How is anyone going to have fun playing Pearled Unicorn or Chub Toad? Another fun part of the puzzle is figuring out ways to break cards that should be bad, but are actually good in specific decks. If you want to play with a wider pool of cards, look at singleton formats like Brawl and Commander. Because you can only play with 1 copy of each card in your deck, you're forced to play a much wider pool of cards, which makes a lot more cards playable. That's why Commander is so popular.
(3) For fast decks especially, yes. That's why most players choose to go first when they win the die roll. Playing a best-of-3 fixes that somewhat. Still, each of you should be going first 50% of the time so it shouldn't matter. If you don't like the randomness of the die roll, look at other formats. In multiplayer and Commander and Brawl, the first turn advantage matters much less.
(4) That's part of the game. You're not building decks to play in a vaccuum against ghost players. You're building decks to play against your friends. Choose cards that work well against your friends. Don't include cards if they're not good against what your friends play. If your friend plays fast decks, don't just play 7-mana bombs, play cards that stop fast decks.
The bigger problem is you're playing 60-card 1v1 casual Modern. That's not a well-defined casual format. It's just Modern for people who can't afford Tier 1 decks, but it encourages players to build as close to Tier 1 Modern as possible. I think you'll enjoy multiplayer formats and singleton formats a lot more.
There is a lot that you can do, but it greatly depends on your resources (not just money, but mainly your card pool).
First and most importantly, you are a filthy casual and your friend is the allstar tournament/netdeck player.
Totally joking about the adjectives. However you to want two different things: you want to play to have fun, he wants to play to win.
Sure you could always ditch him since you have plenty of people in your playgroup from the sounds of it, but that seems like your last resort.
As you said, he is a friend.
The first thing that comes to mind are variants. Planechase will change the rules around. Horde will have you playing together. Archenemy will combine forces. Other variants may even force a different deck into his hands. This will let him still try to win, but it will probably be less against you or with a less finely tuned deck.
If he always disables you at first, it sounds like you are dueling. Don't duel. Play multiplayer. No one else around? Play two-headed giant where each of you are running two decks.
You could also opt to swap decks for a few games. Maybe he doesn't like getting his strategy destroyed so quickly (maybe he does, that bad boy).
On that like you could fight fire with fire. Elite Arcanist with Turf Wound and run Boomerang on Isochron Scepter with Ankh of Mishrawhile running counterspells (I assume against instants) and Propaganda.
Or make a fast paced pauper deck that goes against his meta to make sure he understands the feeling.
You could also ask him to build a deck that can keep up with his. This would be something that you could do together and if it isn't up to snuff, the two of you continue to tweak it together.
Man, this sounds like my Junior High days, when every freaking game you'd eat a Hymn to Tourach on Turn 2.
Honestly, I can sympathize with the both of you. There ain't nothing wrong with playing to win, but if the way you play to win ends up turning a lot of people off, you quickly find yourself with no one to play with. One of the reasons commander's so good- the prospect of a 3 on 1 does a good job of keeping players a little more fair. Even then, I'm careful about running a deck like my Animar deck, because it can be pretty alienating to enough people when it properly goes off, and I know my playgroups don't want to face it every game.
My best advice is to build another deck designed to disrupt the way he plays, and to force him into building a different deck to combat it, which opens up the meta between you (is it a meta if its two players?) to where you're each playing more decks, which might open it up to where you can play in the playstyle you like from time to time. Barring that, play more multiplayer formats, or, worst comes to worse- just don't play Magic with him.
I practice for FNM with my brother in law from time to time, who has whatever the clear front runner is in modern built at any given time.
It sucks, but I know if he's going to take the time to play with me he wants practice with his deck. I've just started building up to that standard when I'm brewing. Nothing overly hateful, but you'll tend to see a little more modal style spells, gravehate, board clears, etc. in the main than normal when I'm drafting a deck idea.
I scratch the casual itch at FNM. I sit to play and have fun, and will routinely ask to play more games even after my matches are done in whatever format I'm playing regardless of victor.
I can be a spike, especially if someone does something unsportsmanlike like (scouts casual games and preboards cards good for particular decks before round 1).
Something that has helped me in brewing is the following:
1. When I buy new cards I try and focus on 2 things. The first is finishing whatever deck I'm currently working on and the second is buy dedicated hate that is the top 1-5 cards for each color on dealing with a particular permanent or zone in the game. I.e. I make sure I have playset a of the some of the best graveyard hate options for each color (pricey but known cards like rest in peace, cheap alternatives like nihil spellbomb, or beaters with built in answers like scavenging ooze).
2. I make sure I have a game plan that be assembled through interaction. It helps to outline what is plan A of attack, plan B? Can you fit in a plan C+? For example, when I play elves I usually use ezuri as my plan A. I have shaman of the pack for plan B. westvale abbey is a good plan C and takes up one slot. I've built a warrior elves list that abuses bramblewood paragon and metallic mimic with hardened scales and joraga warcaller from these same principles. Much of the deck ported over from your modern GB elf lists, but it plays so different.
3. I play interaction myself. You just can't underestimate the quality of life and breathing room 1-2 pieces of interaction will buy you in modern. I play a saheeli combo deck for fun with liquimetal coating and altar of the brood for the luls. When looking for interaction abrade does a heck of a job at clearing out smaller creature combo pieces or any permanent once coating is online. That's a lot of heavy lifting that one slot is giving me. Same for metallic rebuke which lets me speedbump the opponent and deploy my engine pieces with limited resources.
4. Focus on strats you have an affinity for. I'm not a bad control player and I can pick up some wins. However, I'm a far superior combo player. I tend to be more successful with my reads and executing a concise game plan. If I build a control heavy deck (BUG teachings is a great example I've been tinkering with this past month) I can't expect the same less of wins.
Hope this helps.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
This might seem like a weird topic but I need some others opinions by now to discuss the matter on how to solve it.
Basically I have a best friend whom I play MTG with regularly. We have been good friends for quite som time and we meet once a week to throw cards and have a chat. It used to be fine, but there is a clear difference in MTG philosophy between us and now it is starting to show. The problem is that while I build decks as thematic engines, he plays MTG to "beat the resource limit". In practice this means that most my decks spend turn 1-2 on investing in value while he spends the first 3 turns investing heavily in screwing me and up and beating my ass. You know, like a typical modern tournament player.
The problem is I have been trying to talk with him and he is very good at closing the argument before we go anywhere or just pointing the finger back at me saying "well your decks are good too!" but in practice, and we have done the math, he usually wins 75% of the games and sometimes more. And the wins I get are not good wins because he just scoops if he didnt win the first 3-4 turns and thats the point where I finally got my engine going.
So the issue is I feel like he is forcing me to play magic a way that really doesnt suit me. It is weird because some of the most fun matches we have had are with decks he had that were more grindy and down to earth but he seems to want to push the boundaries as much as possible and it usually doesnt take more than a couple of months and then his fun deck has turned into a deck where by turn four he has disrupted my plan, killed my board and gotten me down to 10 health.
I know this is unusual because I have several playgroups and this person he is the only one who leaves me with a sour taste in my mouth when playing MTG.
My question to you guys are, have you experienced anything similar and what was the solution for you? What do you think would be the best?
As someone who plays to win and builds decks accordingly, I know that a lot of people look down on it as some sort of toxic behavior. You sorta indicate that too, claiming he "points the finger back at you" by saying your decks are good. That is a bit silly in my opinion. You are a bit salty about losing, and blaming him for building more efficient decks. Nobody is required to play differently to let you win.
Thanks for the answer! Since you seem to have the same mentality as my friend, I think discussing with you is perfect. The main problem is actually that my friend isnt very good at analyzing and discussing it, for him it becomes personal and so his response is usually just "git good". I am very much into feedback so I would love to hear your opinion!
My questions to you are;
(1): What limitations do you set for yourself when deckbuilding? I have argued that if one strives to push the efficiency limits, then eventually one will reach the only barricade that is in the game and that is the format defining framework. E.g if we play casual modern and he keeps pushing the boundary, eventually we will just be playing tier 1 modern.
(2): Does it bother you that, by pushing the limitations of the game and solving the efficiency puzzle, you effectively eliminate more than 90% of all magic cards and end up with a much more predictable pool of cards? Only a select few cards in each new set are modern playable.
(3): I have argued that when the efficiency curve has been pushed as far as possible, the first turn advantage becomes much more apparent. Our statistics show this as well. Is this something you have seen as well, and if so does it bother you at all?
(4): What is your opinion on meta-picking cards versus your friends? My friend has already commented that there are cards he thought about putting in his decks but that they would rarely have an effect versus me specifically and then he put in direct counters instead.
The problem you describe is not specific to Magic. It can happen with "casual" play of any game, because different people have a different idea of what "casual" means. Some people are just more competitive than others and want to Go for the Throat every time. Others want something relaxed and slower where they can joke around with their friends and not feel too much pressure to be competitive, maybe have the time to set up fun flashy things. You can't force your friend to view the game the same way you do. Both are valid perspectives. He just wants a more competitive version of the game than you do. You're best off finding other players who want to play the game the way you do so you can all equally enjoy it. If your circle of players is limited, you could try changing the format or imposing house rules so your friend can't build as oppressive decks. Modern isn't the only format.
To answer your questions:
(1) Format restrictions. You can also establish your own house rules. Ban cards that are "unfun" to play against. Impose a budget restriction on decks (e.g. $50, $100). Budget is usually what stops kitchen tables from turning into Tier 1. It also poses a different kind of deckbuilding puzzle challenge for competitive types.
(2) No. Most cards are bad. That's part of the puzzle. How is anyone going to have fun playing Pearled Unicorn or Chub Toad? Another fun part of the puzzle is figuring out ways to break cards that should be bad, but are actually good in specific decks. If you want to play with a wider pool of cards, look at singleton formats like Brawl and Commander. Because you can only play with 1 copy of each card in your deck, you're forced to play a much wider pool of cards, which makes a lot more cards playable. That's why Commander is so popular.
(3) For fast decks especially, yes. That's why most players choose to go first when they win the die roll. Playing a best-of-3 fixes that somewhat. Still, each of you should be going first 50% of the time so it shouldn't matter. If you don't like the randomness of the die roll, look at other formats. In multiplayer and Commander and Brawl, the first turn advantage matters much less.
(4) That's part of the game. You're not building decks to play in a vaccuum against ghost players. You're building decks to play against your friends. Choose cards that work well against your friends. Don't include cards if they're not good against what your friends play. If your friend plays fast decks, don't just play 7-mana bombs, play cards that stop fast decks.
The bigger problem is you're playing 60-card 1v1 casual Modern. That's not a well-defined casual format. It's just Modern for people who can't afford Tier 1 decks, but it encourages players to build as close to Tier 1 Modern as possible. I think you'll enjoy multiplayer formats and singleton formats a lot more.
First and most importantly, you are a
filthycasual and your friend is theallstartournament/netdeck player.Totally joking about the adjectives. However you to want two different things: you want to play to have fun, he wants to play to win.
Sure you could always ditch him since you have plenty of people in your playgroup from the sounds of it, but that seems like your last resort.
As you said, he is a friend.
The first thing that comes to mind are variants. Planechase will change the rules around. Horde will have you playing together. Archenemy will combine forces. Other variants may even force a different deck into his hands. This will let him still try to win, but it will probably be less against you or with a less finely tuned deck.
If he always disables you at first, it sounds like you are dueling. Don't duel. Play multiplayer. No one else around? Play two-headed giant where each of you are running two decks.
You could also opt to swap decks for a few games. Maybe he doesn't like getting his strategy destroyed so quickly (maybe he does, that bad boy).
On that like you could fight fire with fire. Elite Arcanist with Turf Wound and run Boomerang on Isochron Scepter with Ankh of Mishrawhile running counterspells (I assume against instants) and Propaganda.
Or make a fast paced pauper deck that goes against his meta to make sure he understands the feeling.
You could also ask him to build a deck that can keep up with his. This would be something that you could do together and if it isn't up to snuff, the two of you continue to tweak it together.
Honestly, I can sympathize with the both of you. There ain't nothing wrong with playing to win, but if the way you play to win ends up turning a lot of people off, you quickly find yourself with no one to play with. One of the reasons commander's so good- the prospect of a 3 on 1 does a good job of keeping players a little more fair. Even then, I'm careful about running a deck like my Animar deck, because it can be pretty alienating to enough people when it properly goes off, and I know my playgroups don't want to face it every game.
My best advice is to build another deck designed to disrupt the way he plays, and to force him into building a different deck to combat it, which opens up the meta between you (is it a meta if its two players?) to where you're each playing more decks, which might open it up to where you can play in the playstyle you like from time to time. Barring that, play more multiplayer formats, or, worst comes to worse- just don't play Magic with him.
It sucks, but I know if he's going to take the time to play with me he wants practice with his deck. I've just started building up to that standard when I'm brewing. Nothing overly hateful, but you'll tend to see a little more modal style spells, gravehate, board clears, etc. in the main than normal when I'm drafting a deck idea.
I scratch the casual itch at FNM. I sit to play and have fun, and will routinely ask to play more games even after my matches are done in whatever format I'm playing regardless of victor.
I can be a spike, especially if someone does something unsportsmanlike like (scouts casual games and preboards cards good for particular decks before round 1).
Something that has helped me in brewing is the following:
1. When I buy new cards I try and focus on 2 things. The first is finishing whatever deck I'm currently working on and the second is buy dedicated hate that is the top 1-5 cards for each color on dealing with a particular permanent or zone in the game. I.e. I make sure I have playset a of the some of the best graveyard hate options for each color (pricey but known cards like rest in peace, cheap alternatives like nihil spellbomb, or beaters with built in answers like scavenging ooze).
2. I make sure I have a game plan that be assembled through interaction. It helps to outline what is plan A of attack, plan B? Can you fit in a plan C+? For example, when I play elves I usually use ezuri as my plan A. I have shaman of the pack for plan B. westvale abbey is a good plan C and takes up one slot. I've built a warrior elves list that abuses bramblewood paragon and metallic mimic with hardened scales and joraga warcaller from these same principles. Much of the deck ported over from your modern GB elf lists, but it plays so different.
3. I play interaction myself. You just can't underestimate the quality of life and breathing room 1-2 pieces of interaction will buy you in modern. I play a saheeli combo deck for fun with liquimetal coating and altar of the brood for the luls. When looking for interaction abrade does a heck of a job at clearing out smaller creature combo pieces or any permanent once coating is online. That's a lot of heavy lifting that one slot is giving me. Same for metallic rebuke which lets me speedbump the opponent and deploy my engine pieces with limited resources.
4. Focus on strats you have an affinity for. I'm not a bad control player and I can pick up some wins. However, I'm a far superior combo player. I tend to be more successful with my reads and executing a concise game plan. If I build a control heavy deck (BUG teachings is a great example I've been tinkering with this past month) I can't expect the same less of wins.
Hope this helps.