This is good advice. It's easy to believe the other guy's deck is unbeatably strong until you try it yourself. Then you start to see the glaring weaknesses that you didn't before. It goes the other way too, control players can sometimes be quick to dismiss aggro decks as linear and brainless.
I straight up don't believe the story about a 3 year old getting a 75% win rate. There are too many decisions to be made in a game of magic. How did they know to play a land each turn? How did they know the timi g for counters? How did they knkw where to drag the counterspell? How did they win? Did they know to activate a planeswalker each turn?
It sounds like you guys have a preferred playstyle, probably mudrange, and you are running up against the hard counter to that playstyle. If you are really running into so many control decks, switch to faster aggro and go underneath them. The vast majority of counterspella are only ever one-for-one. Just play cheaper cards and play more than one each turn.
It comes down to "competitive" decks vs casual decks.
Some brew of commons / uncommons and some random rares is not going to cut it against a proper competitive deck.
People play some rounds on MTG-Arena and at some point they face some control decks that have mass-removal and play with a goal in mind, while they just slam some cards down and want to win quickly.
75%+ win rate with a competitive control deck vs some casual pile of cards ? Absolutely.
Its like people that know what they are doing in Limited Draft, vs people that have no clue drafting, they will lose so badly, and think its some imbalance in the game, while its really just them failing to bring the necessary tools to the table in the first place (and that means, knowledge in terms of limited, and a meta-game deck for constructed, you need to know what you have to beat, otherwise you are just playing poker in the dark).
Any 3 year old that is even capable to play Magic, i would assume to be some kind of prodigy.
----
In the "old" days of Magic, blue was particularly powerful, as card draw and counterspells where placed in that color primarily, black got a bunch for life payments, but any other color, white, green and red very rarely got any card draw at all that was remotely competitive.
So if a deck wanted to be a control deck, they basically had to play blue.
The most traditional classic form of a control deck had to play white and blue, for mass removal, card draw and counterspells.
A lot of combo decks in the Urzas Saga era of Magic had blue in them, as so many key-combo pieces where blue to untap your lands and generate more mana.
With time that all switched and watered down, as now, basically any color has card-draw (white gets the least, and does so in very limited scope).
In modern in particular, blue gets paired with red or white, as Magic is much more about color-pairs then mono colors at this point, almost any set is designed around color pairs or more, we did not get a mono-color matters set in basically decades.
Control with Counterspells was always disliked by people that wanted to play a slower game, but the slower game is exactly what a control deck wants, so as long as you play only 1 spell a turn, you basically just play into the strength of a control deck.
As the easy solution to that is to play more cheap spells, thats where mass removal has to clean up, and the entire matchup becomes much more of a resource-war.
Overall control plays many more lands than a low-curve aggro deck, so they will draw more of them, they quite literally have more "dead" draws.
To counter that control decks need some form of card draw, so as long as the game trades 1 for 1 card , you need to get ahead somehow, producing card advantage or double-play in a turn to sneak something through, once its resolved, they need removal to get rid of it, which is also a specific answer.
So to be fair, a competitive control deck is not fun to play against with a "casual" deck that is not optimized.
The entire point of a control deck is to quite literally control the game, if you cant do that, you lose.
For a combo deck the game plan is to find the combo and sneak it through for the win, which is once again a very different kind of game.
An aggro deck wants to play as much as possible quickly and win through an opponent that might struggle to find the answers in time, so successful aggro decks become quite the glass canon to accomplish that, chances to win a longer game diminish drastically.
What you might consider "fun" is what most casual decks aim at, a bunch of slow midrange decks, mainly creatures and removal to have a back and forth game.
But thats just one aspect of Magic.
So you have to broaden your understanding of different decks, and the competitive aspect requires a metagame of competitive decks that are tuned to play against each other ... a random casual deck will have a much harder time to compete, as you are just a worse version of either competitive deck.
It comes down to "competitive" decks vs casual decks.
Some brew of commons / uncommons and some random rares is not going to cut it against a proper competitive deck.
People play some rounds on MTG-Arena and at some point they face some control decks that have mass-removal and play with a goal in mind, while they just slam some cards down and want to win quickly.
75%+ win rate with a competitive control deck vs some casual pile of cards ? Absolutely.
Its like people that know what they are doing in Limited Draft, vs people that have no clue drafting, they will lose so badly, and think its some imbalance in the game, while its really just them failing to bring the necessary tools to the table in the first place (and that means, knowledge in terms of limited, and a meta-game deck for constructed, you need to know what you have to beat, otherwise you are just playing poker in the dark).
WUBRG#BlackLotusMatterWUBRG
๐ฎ๐ฎ๐ฎ #BlueLivesMatter ๐ฎ๐ฎ๐ฎ
----
In the "old" days of Magic, blue was particularly powerful, as card draw and counterspells where placed in that color primarily, black got a bunch for life payments, but any other color, white, green and red very rarely got any card draw at all that was remotely competitive.
So if a deck wanted to be a control deck, they basically had to play blue.
The most traditional classic form of a control deck had to play white and blue, for mass removal, card draw and counterspells.
A lot of combo decks in the Urzas Saga era of Magic had blue in them, as so many key-combo pieces where blue to untap your lands and generate more mana.
With time that all switched and watered down, as now, basically any color has card-draw (white gets the least, and does so in very limited scope).
In modern in particular, blue gets paired with red or white, as Magic is much more about color-pairs then mono colors at this point, almost any set is designed around color pairs or more, we did not get a mono-color matters set in basically decades.
Control with Counterspells was always disliked by people that wanted to play a slower game, but the slower game is exactly what a control deck wants, so as long as you play only 1 spell a turn, you basically just play into the strength of a control deck.
As the easy solution to that is to play more cheap spells, thats where mass removal has to clean up, and the entire matchup becomes much more of a resource-war.
Overall control plays many more lands than a low-curve aggro deck, so they will draw more of them, they quite literally have more "dead" draws.
To counter that control decks need some form of card draw, so as long as the game trades 1 for 1 card , you need to get ahead somehow, producing card advantage or double-play in a turn to sneak something through, once its resolved, they need removal to get rid of it, which is also a specific answer.
So to be fair, a competitive control deck is not fun to play against with a "casual" deck that is not optimized.
The entire point of a control deck is to quite literally control the game, if you cant do that, you lose.
For a combo deck the game plan is to find the combo and sneak it through for the win, which is once again a very different kind of game.
An aggro deck wants to play as much as possible quickly and win through an opponent that might struggle to find the answers in time, so successful aggro decks become quite the glass canon to accomplish that, chances to win a longer game diminish drastically.
What you might consider "fun" is what most casual decks aim at, a bunch of slow midrange decks, mainly creatures and removal to have a back and forth game.
But thats just one aspect of Magic.
So you have to broaden your understanding of different decks, and the competitive aspect requires a metagame of competitive decks that are tuned to play against each other ... a random casual deck will have a much harder time to compete, as you are just a worse version of either competitive deck.
WUBRG#BlackLotusMatterWUBRG
๐ฎ๐ฎ๐ฎ #BlueLivesMatter ๐ฎ๐ฎ๐ฎ