I am wondering if you (the players) metagame your decks.
If you see people starting to play more block, do you then play low-stealth, block-punishers (Aching Beauty/Change of Target/etc) or block-fails decks deliberately so the others will hand-jam?
If you see more and more combat, do you try to arms-race them into more violent combat or go for the Strike: Combat Ends route or for damage prevention?
I have to admit after my trip to Melbourne I did decide to build a few block-punishing and at least one anti-weenie deck. But do you do the same?
Also, is there a deck-type or combat-type you are seeing in your local group and do you plan to metagame it?
We have only the four of us in our group and only two of us actively make new decks. So meta game tends not to be a factor in my deck design.
ReplyDeleteMy most interesting meta was when in London because of the size and constant flow through of travellers. That made it impossible to meta because there were easily 30 different people that would come along over a few months. We would have 3 tables a lot of the time so that really was good for testing new decks as you could be seeing anything and everything.
Obviously because of my situation every tournament I turn up to ends up being a blind meta. That's why I always pick the deck on this side of the ditch so as to not confuse myself with last minute swaps or card changes; hint J!
Generally I actually think it's better not to try and meta as I feel making your deck reliably do it's thing works out best in the long run. If everyone is making interesting and slightly different decks, then wiping the table with a weenie DEM deck isn't that rewarding for me personally.
I don't meta game my decks. But I do take a lot of decks to tournaments (hint seen Simon), and often will go against my better judgement and pick a different deck than I had intended to play.
ReplyDeleteAs Simon says :) it is always best to build a reliable deck. Building a deck with other players decks in mind will generally leave you with a not-quite so functioning deck as you could have had. Even worse, if you build for a particular meta and then don't face it, you've shot yourself in the foot.
Build a deck that you're comfortable with. Build a deck that you understand. Build a deck that you like, and play that.
Due to my playgroup being rather new and small, not many people are building new decks, so I try to challenge the meta to help develop the group and keep everyone thinking about new ways to do things.
ReplyDeleteI agree that normally it is best just to create a strong deck that can execute your strategy for a tournament.
Nah, I don't think we metagame. Most of us in Brisbane play a range of decks. What does tend to happen is that you come to recognise other people's decks as the same decks will get played time and time again. You don't necessarily see a new deck every week.
ReplyDeleteI metagame like a mofo! i'll tend to pack a lot of DTs in my decks at the Nats and lot of weenie/sleaze meta in the LCQ.
ReplyDeletethat being said, every card you spend as meta that doesn't match the current game is dead damn weight. so hard meta can swing a game hard in your favour with minimal cost to you, but just jam you bad when you are in need of a clutch play.
meta is one helluva drug.