Unpopular Opinion
General forum
Posted on March 18, 2016, 1:07 p.m. by Durkle
It's no secret that there are a LOT of budget decks all around Tappedout and that they frequently become very popular, which is something I just don't understand. I feel like it's unfair to new players to think that these budget decks are so great and powerful when the truth is that they're just not.
I understand that money is a very real factor in this game considering how crazy expensive it's gotten, which can be very daunting for a new player. Instead of trying to play a sub-optimal version of a good deck, why not play an optimized version of a slightly weaker one? For example, if you're just getting into modern, don't try to make budget UWR Control or Jund, there are plenty of cheap decks that are also very good. Goblins, 8-rack, Stompy, Mono U Tron, and Elemental Combo are all perfectly reasonable decks to name a few.
If you're trying to play standard, don't try to make budget Jeskai without Jace and a good manabase, just play White weenie, Bant Turns, really any variation of ramp, the list goes on.
Maybe it's just me, but I'm just never happy playing a bad version of a good deck. I realize that there will be a lot of people that won't agree with me, I guess I just want to know what other people think and if anyone else shares the same opinion.
mathimus55 says... #3
I agree and disagree to a point. I think starting with budget substitutions is fine(speaking as a non-standard player) and gradually working up to a more optimal build over time. You do have to start somewhere with many decks since you can't just jump into a tier 1 deck often times. Jumping into affinity for example and only playing 1 Glimmervoid or Arcbound Ravager because of budget restrictions is fine at first because the deck building process is definitely one that takes time.
Where I certainly do agree with you is when players want to build tier 1 decks with bad budget substitutes and expect the deck to run equally as powerful. Jund without Liliana of the Veil is simply not as powerful. That doesn't mean you can't work up towards that goal, but don't build a budget version of a deck and expect it to be equally as powerful. There is a reason powerful cards are expensive. A powered bad deck will surely beat a half assed good deck fairly often. You can't expect your Duress substitutions to work as well at Thoughtseize against a 30 creature zoo deck.
I just don't think the "budget alternatives" should be seen as the end goal, which happens most of the time when it comes to budgeted versions of decks. I completely understand if you don't want to invest in expensive cards and playing cheaper decks. On the other hand, players just can't be upset when instead of budget decks they're just playing bad versions of other decks.
March 18, 2016 1:35 p.m.
Durkle,
I understand where you're coming from ... I play a lot of Commander and it's always kind of sad seeing someone "water down" an otherwise awesome deck with a bunch of cards that don't really seem to fit.
That said though, I build on a strict budget, so have never (in EDH, Standard, or anything) really played an "optimum" deck. I still get a ton of joy though from trying to build the best possible deck I can within the budget constraints I have. And I like building decks up over time (by cracking key cards in a Draft/trading/saving up for them/etc), so I never really mind playing an incomplete playset or whatever.
And the joy of playing tight (and maybe a little lucky) and completely wrecking a $750+ deck with my $100 deck?
Priceless! :-)
March 18, 2016 1:38 p.m. Edited.
VampireArmy says... #5
Anyone who uses Tappedout's votes of popularity as a factor in deciding the viability of deck rather than say...top 8s or 16s of official events probably isn't looking for competitiveness.
March 18, 2016 1:47 p.m.
I get what you're saying. But Tappedout wasn't made for Top 8 decks. MTGTOP8 and many others do that already for us. Tappedout is a place for deckbrewers to come together and discuss ideas for decks, competitive or otherwise.
If they want to try out a cheap version of a good deck and see if it's just as good then let them do their thing. I'm personally not one to believe that the game has ever been completely figured out. It's only because of people brewing like this that new ideas arise that eventually penetrate the meta. You can't justly say that Deck A can't get any better or that Deck X, Deck Y, and Deck Z are the best decks you're ever going to get in Format 1.
I often describe tappedout to those unfamiliar as "Facebook for Magic players."
That description alone should help define all the nuances and perks of this website.
March 18, 2016 1:58 p.m.
Oh believe me, I understand where all of you are coming from, and I think I may have come off slightly worse than I meant to. Building cheap decks can be fun, especially from a deckbuilding standpoint. I'm just referring to these "Best 50 dollars you'll ever spend" "Best Budget Living End Evar" decks. If you're deadset on playing a deck that is cheap, it should be something different, not a watered down version of a good deck. Trying to play jund without goyf or Living End without Fulminator Mage is just bragging about stripping away a lot of a deck's power.
For example, my history with playing modern has been this: When I first started out playing the format, I took a look at what the best decks were and consider my options weighing price and how much I thought I would like it. I ultimately came to Tron. I thought the urza lands were super cool and I new I wanted to make a deck with them. However, I knew that I couldn't afford Grove of the Burnwillows or Karn Liberated, so I instead opted to play a more fringe version that played Tooth and Nail. It was a ton of fun to play, was pretty competitive (my local store is extremely cutthroat though), and I ended up loving it. When I decided to make a new deck, I realized I already had a very good Jund manabase since I had Verdant Catacombs and RTR was just printed so I got shocks for cheap. Instead of trying to play Jund or Living End, I opted to play Loam. Again, it was super fun and I loved it a lot. I even ended up taking it to an SCG open in Atlanta where I did OK, which was my first event. Since then I've played Skred, Enduring Ideal, WR Twin, and today I'm on Scapeshift. It's a pretty roundabout path I know, but I've loved it.
I just don't see a lot of other people doing this. It's like everyone just wants to make Burn without Goblin Guide and Eidolon of the Great Revel and then it becomes top rated on Tappeout. If you want to make a cheap deck, I say there's nothing wrong with living on the wild side, just don't try to make a good deck cheap by taking away what made it great in the first place. That's all I'm saying.
March 18, 2016 2:05 p.m.
TMBRLZ VampireArmy those are both good points, I didn't see them before I posted my last thing.
March 18, 2016 2:12 p.m.
Reading your response -
You also have to consider a lot of people use these budget decks at platforms for the real thing.
How depressing is it sometimes to be building up a selection of cards for a particular meta deck and still need about ten cards that regrettably add up to over $150 (if not much more)?
These budget variants put people in the right direction of starting their journey towards the end goal meta competitive variant, while still getting to try the deck, even if it's just a shell. This also means they'll be much more comfortable walking into a tournament with it off the bat than they would have been had they just sleeved it all for the first time.
March 18, 2016 2:54 p.m.
theemptyquiver says... #10
Also, Durkle, some people just play MTG casually with their friends to have fun and the competitive side of tournaments and FNM do not factor into their deck building.
Basically up votes don't equate to deck power and strength. Sometimes the highest rated decks are just popular because someone put a lot of energy and creativity into making it a special thing to read about and look at.
March 18, 2016 3:02 p.m.
theemptyquiver says... #11
I often like reading people's deck stories. So many people put so much love and personality into their decks.
It's part of what makes MTG such a special game.
March 18, 2016 3:03 p.m.
vampirelazarus says... #12
To go along with TMBRLZ post, and to not add anything to the conversation...
I need 4 Gaea's Cradles, 2 Bayou, 4 Glimpse of Nature and 3 Natural Order to complete Legacy Elves...
Which is pretty expensive.
March 18, 2016 3:26 p.m. Edited.
It's just a different paradigm I guess. I have an older brother who is competitive in everything and he's the one who taught me to play the game. All of my friends who play are pretty competitive as well, so I don't really have a casual playgroup.
Point is I've always been competitive and I guess part of me wants to assume that everyone wants to be, which isn't necessarily true. Thanks everyone for your responses
Also vampirelazarus I can't help you there, I've always shied away from legacy for reasons that are easy to infer. I do have a playset of Blood Moons and Chalice of the Voids though. I might do Moggcatcher or something one day ;)
March 18, 2016 4:09 p.m.
vampirelazarus says... #14
My statement I guess also could add to the conversation by being a real world example of people not having the cash to shell out for decks, and therefore default to budget decks.
But really, nearly $1k for those. And that's all I need for the damn deck.
Epochalyptik says... #2
Part of it may come down to deck preference. It's reasonable, if competitively inadvisable, for someone to play a less powerful version of a deck they really enjoy rather than a full power version of a deck they dislike.
March 18, 2016 1:11 p.m.