Poll of the Day > Why am I forced to put useless cards in my deck?

(+) Yeah! (+)

I just lost the game because I drew nothing but useless cards.

I just lost the game because I didn't draw enough useless cards.


MTG sucks.
---

Wow Yu-Gi-Oh is better
---

Because what would happen if everybody only used the best cards?
---

Why in the world would you be forced to put useless cards in a deck? Learn how to build a better deck

Land is why that game is outdated.
---

You need more card filtering.
---

Clearly they have a use if you need them. And if you hate conventional resource management in CCGs, go play Magi-Nation or Spoils.
---

Lands are the reason why I never got into MtG. I despise having to draw resources in card games.

I mean, what sort of format are you playing?

There's two basic answers here:

The first is to keep you from just playing Mountains and Lightning Bolts all day, so that you have to think about your deck.

The second is that if you genuinely have so few cards that you actually have to put useless ones in there to make it to a regulation stack size, then it keeps you buying cards. I probably spent about $200 on booster packs before I was consistently drawing cards I wanted to play.

tropireno posted...

MTG sucks.

No argument there. Filthy habit, glad I was able to find a buyer for my cards when I gave it up.
---

The_Doge posted...

Wow Yu-Gi-Oh is better

---

helly posted...

The_Doge posted...

Wow Yu-Gi-Oh is better

Nah, i still lost cause they gave me 5 spell in first play. Whay the hell?
---

ha21nagamas posted...

helly posted...

The_Doge posted...

Wow Yu-Gi-Oh is better

Nah, i still lost cause they gave me 5 spell in first play. Whay the hell?

And none of those spells were 'draw', 'search your deck', or 'summon' cards? I'd say it's your own fault if half the spells in your deck are useless.
---

I've never played MTG, but if you're only drawing useless cards, it sounds like MTG only has useless cards to offer. So you did a good job of making it sound like it sucks.
---

Mario_VS_DK posted...

ha21nagamas posted...

helly posted...

The_Doge posted...

Wow Yu-Gi-Oh is better

Nah, i still lost cause they gave me 5 spell in first play. Whay the hell?

And none of those spells were 'draw', 'search your deck', or 'summon' cards? I'd say it's your own fault if half the spells in your deck are useless.

My monsters makes up about 90% of my deck yet the game still draw me some spell and trap card :(
---

Why does anyone enjoy deck building? It's such a tedious and sterile task.

Video games with deck building mechanics are usually tripe (minus MMBN).
---

Yeah, I hate Magics clunky rescource system, at least pokemon has enough draw power amd easy search that its much easier but fuck having to draw resources
---

Hmm, cannot say I have ever had that issue, if you have the right land ratio for your deck, unless your deck sucks you shouldn't have an issue.

I actually have a deck with only 8 lands and I have no issue with it.

The worst is people like this guy aboce "you just have the wrong number of lands in your deck, I run X lands and its fine for me" like its not possible to consistently brick np matter what you do
---

TheSlinja posted...

The worst is people like this guy aboce "you just have the wrong number of lands in your deck, I run X lands and its fine for me" like its not possible to consistently brick np matter what you do

Did you read my post? I said if you have the right land ratio FOR YOUR DECK, this means every deck needs different land ratios to work as should, otherwise most games will feel like you are either swamped with land, or starved, neither is good. If you spend most games with either then change your land ratio till it is more reliable.

Solid Sonic posted...

Why does anyone enjoy deck building? It's such a tedious and sterile task.

Video games with deck building mechanics are usually tripe (minus MMBN).

Deck building is exactly the same thing as building your team/equipment set in an action game or RPG. You just have many, many more options.
---

Babbit55 posted...

TheSlinja posted...

The worst is people like this guy aboce "you just have the wrong number of lands in your deck, I run X lands and its fine for me" like its not possible to consistently brick np matter what you do

Did you read my post? I said if you have the right land ratio FOR YOUR DECK, this means every deck needs different land ratios to work as should, otherwise most games will feel like you are either swamped with land, or starved, neither is good. If you spend most games with either then change your land ratio till it is more reliable.

and what Im saying is that even with the perfect land rario for your deck bad draws can just continuously screw you over, Ive bricked on land with little land in the deck and run dry woth plently of land in the deck
---

keyblader1985 posted...

Solid Sonic posted...

Why does anyone enjoy deck building? It's such a tedious and sterile task.

Video games with deck building mechanics are usually tripe (minus MMBN).

Deck building is exactly the same thing as building your team/equipment set in an action game or RPG. You just have many, many more options.

Well I'm not too strongly into RPGs so...

The problem I have with deck building is you not only want to anticipate how you can use it but how your opponent can disrupt it. That requires too much forward thinking since you're having to play theoretical games in your head in order to weigh the best option to make your deck with.

"Can they negate this effect and will my deck still hold water if they do", "If they play this card would I be able to draw the proper response card out of my own deck given a random shuffle", "What is the overall strategy this deck needs to accomplish", etc.

Those kinds of questions just bog things down for me. At least with an action game you can mostly plan around what you can do alone and not also what your opponent can do in response.
---

TheSlinja posted...

Babbit55 posted...

TheSlinja posted...

The worst is people like this guy aboce "you just have the wrong number of lands in your deck, I run X lands and its fine for me" like its not possible to consistently brick np matter what you do

Did you read my post? I said if you have the right land ratio FOR YOUR DECK, this means every deck needs different land ratios to work as should, otherwise most games will feel like you are either swamped with land, or starved, neither is good. If you spend most games with either then change your land ratio till it is more reliable.

and what Im saying is that even with the perfect land rario for your deck bad draws can just continuously screw you over, Ive bricked on land with little land in the deck and run dry woth plently of land in the deck

Yeah, random draw can suck like that, though with the right ratio it shouldn't happen too often. that deck with only 8 lands needs a max of 2 per game (Mana generating elf deck), at least 1 and one of the many tap for 1 elves in the deck is enough to start.

Solid Sonic posted...

The problem I have with deck building is you not only want to anticipate how you can use it but how your opponent can disrupt it. That requires too much forward thinking since you're having to play theoretical games in your head in order to weigh the best option to make your deck with.

"Can they negate this effect and will my deck still hold water if they do", "If they play this card would I be able to draw the proper response card out of my own deck given a random shuffle", "What is the overall strategy this deck needs to accomplish", etc.

Thats the funnest part for me lol
---

TheSlinja posted...

The worst is people like this guy aboce "you just have the wrong number of lands in your deck, I run X lands and its fine for me" like its not possible to consistently brick np matter what you do

You will always have the one or two games where you get mana flooded or mana fucked, but as long as you have a decent ratio of lands to low cost cards to high cost cards and are not shuffling in a way that will keep your land cards stacked together it should not be a consistent problem. I have a deck with 4 mountain cards and I get enough mana.

Solid Sonic posted...

Why does anyone enjoy deck building? It's such a tedious and sterile task.

I used to love coming up with various strategies and trying them out. Best part of playing imo.
---

ha21nagamas posted...

Mario_VS_DK posted...

ha21nagamas posted...

helly posted...

The_Doge posted...

Wow Yu-Gi-Oh is better

Nah, i still lost cause they gave me 5 spell in first play. Whay the hell?

And none of those spells were 'draw', 'search your deck', or 'summon' cards? I'd say it's your own fault if half the spells in your deck are useless.

My monsters makes up about 90% of my deck yet the game still draw me some spell and trap card :(

90%, if you understand the game properly, is 36 out of 40 of your cards. You literally can't have only spell and trap cards in your first 5 cards. If you're using more than 40 cards in your deck, literally stop it and your problem is fixed. All adding extra cards does is increase inconsistency which means that you will very often get those awful first draws.

Besides, you should have 15-25 monsters, 5-15 spell and 5-15 trap cards in most decks. There are plenty of exceptions, but that's generally how you want it if you're building a competitive deck.
---

Solid Sonic posted...

The problem I have with deck building is you not only want to anticipate how you can use it but how your opponent can disrupt it. That requires too much forward thinking since you're having to play theoretical games in your head in order to weigh the best option to make your deck with.

"Can they negate this effect and will my deck still hold water if they do", "If they play this card would I be able to draw the proper response card out of my own deck given a random shuffle", "What is the overall strategy this deck needs to accomplish", etc.

I get what you're saying, but that's exactly what the appeal is for some people.
---

Legend of the Five Rings is the only true answer.

Well maybe. Have to see how it looks after the FFG reboot.

Pokemon never had this issue.
---

Yellow posted...

Land is why that game is outdated.

Mark Rosewater always says that Magic's mana system with land cards is a big part of what makes the game exciting, for many reasons:

http://magic.wizards.com/en/articles/archive/mana-action-2011-05-23

Near the end he says that mana screw and mana flood aren't fun for the person they happen to, but that a different mana system would make Magic more monotonous overall. I'm not sure if he says it in that article, but elsewhere he's said that one silver lining of mana screw/flood is that they give players a tiny bit of hope that they can beat much better players in tournaments (if the better players draw almost no lands or almost all lands).

I really liked Magic's diverse land system though. HS can feel so bland in that way.
---

ha21nagamas posted...

Mario_VS_DK posted...

ha21nagamas posted...

helly posted...

The_Doge posted...

Wow Yu-Gi-Oh is better

Nah, i still lost cause they gave me 5 spell in first play. Whay the hell?

And none of those spells were 'draw', 'search your deck', or 'summon' cards? I'd say it's your own fault if half the spells in your deck are useless.

My monsters makes up about 90% of my deck yet the game still draw me some spell and trap card :(

Yeah, you need support to win but it's all too common to not get a monster when you need one.

Solid Sonic posted...

Why does anyone enjoy deck building? It's such a tedious and sterile task.

Video games with deck building mechanics are usually tripe (minus MMBN).

Nothing really tedious or sterile about it, especially as demonstrated by your acknowledgment of MMBN. Plus deck building is an evolving process. Your initial build will be honed over time
---

Solid Sonic posted...

The problem I have with deck building is you not only want to anticipate how you can use it but how your opponent can disrupt it. That requires too much forward thinking since you're having to play theoretical games in your head in order to weigh the best option to make your deck with.

"Can they negate this effect and will my deck still hold water if they do", "If they play this card would I be able to draw the proper response card out of my own deck given a random shuffle", "What is the overall strategy this deck needs to accomplish", etc.

Those kinds of questions just bog things down for me. At least with an action game you can mostly plan around what you can do alone and not also what your opponent can do in response.

Given the inherent complexity and options for deck design in MtG, that's not really an issue except in some versions of the competitive meta. It's a bigger issue in something like YGO, I would imagine, where a lack of resource management leads to universal staples and larger archetypes.
---

Yellow posted...

Land is why that game is outdated.

Outdated?
Lol it's the best selling card game there is.

If you are drawing bad cards get better cards, build a better deck, or change your deck to meet your play style.
There should never ever be any "bad" cards in your decks. Bad draws at the time maybe but never useless cards.

knivesX2004 posted...

Lol it's the best selling card game there is.

And?
---

Mario_VS_DK posted...

ha21nagamas posted...

Mario_VS_DK posted...

ha21nagamas posted...

helly posted...

The_Doge posted...

Wow Yu-Gi-Oh is better

Nah, i still lost cause they gave me 5 spell in first play. Whay the hell?

And none of those spells were 'draw', 'search your deck', or 'summon' cards? I'd say it's your own fault if half the spells in your deck are useless.

My monsters makes up about 90% of my deck yet the game still draw me some spell and trap card :(

90%, if you understand the game properly, is 36 out of 40 of your cards. You literally can't have only spell and trap cards in your first 5 cards. If you're using more than 40 cards in your deck, literally stop it and your problem is fixed. All adding extra cards does is increase inconsistency which means that you will very often get those awful first draws.

Besides, you should have 15-25 monsters, 5-15 spell and 5-15 trap cards in most decks. There are plenty of exceptions, but that's generally how you want it if you're building a competitive deck.

Okay thanks bro. I need to sort i
Things out like having too much card that is useless to my strategy and buying some new card imo
---

Change the rules, at least if you can find other people who want to play the same way.

Instead of adding land to your deck, you can choose not to draw a card at the start of any of your turns, and instead play any basic land (Directly into play).

Not only would this prevent mana problems, but it would make playing multi-color decks a bit easier (compensation for not being able to use special land cards).

You can still use any other mana cards in your deck like normal (including special land cards, creature cards that give mana, artifacts that give mana or convert it etc).

Minimum size of the deck would drop as well (Think it's 40? Been a long time since I played) to 30.

Would take a bit of the strategy out of the game, but mainly just make it less random, and obviously faster as well.
---

Kronagar posted...

Lands are the reason why I never got into MtG. I despise having to draw resources in card games.

---

It's part of the game. About 20% of matches are going to be decided by varience
---

MICHALECOLE posted...

Why in the world would you be forced to put useless cards in a deck? Learn how to build a better deck

---

love the DotPW series, wish they released more (or even rereleased 2012-14) on ps4.

it's not pay-to-win because everyone has the same exact cards for each deck (once you finish unlock). how you build makes a huge difference. i had decks where i removed a whole color and they were still excellent (and usually better than they were)
---

Yellow posted...

knivesX2004 posted...

Lol it's the best selling card game there is.

And?

And you wonder why I call you a troll.
---

Zeus posted...

Yellow posted...

knivesX2004 posted...

Lol it's the best selling card game there is.

And?

And you wonder why I call you a troll.

Best Selling doesn't particularly mean it doesnt have dated design, not that I agree with him but its not like best selling was a meaningful counter point
---

I love mtg. I have 34 decks. Use some lands with cycling if need, some scry stuff, etc. Also there shouldn't be useless cards in your deck. Each card should have a purpose.
---

I've been playing for 20 years. Post your deck if you want I can see of I can help.
---

Also there are a lot more non useless lands.
---

TheSlinja posted...

Zeus posted...

Yellow posted...

knivesX2004 posted...

Lol it's the best selling card game there is.

And?

And you wonder why I call you a troll.

Best Selling doesn't particularly mean it doesnt have dated design, not that I agree with him but its not like best selling was a meaningful counter point

Given the wholly subject nature of popularity and the fact that conventions tie directly into success, I'm not entirely sure that it isn't a meaningful counter point. Popular doesn't necessarily mean good, but when there's no objective metric for something being outdated (ie, hardware) you have to rely on alternative measures. More so, Yellow's original comment was trolling and his flippant response -- which goes into no detail -- reinforced that.

And keep in mind that CCGs without dedicated resource cards started appearing right when MtG was taking off, but without exception they're all gone now (or, at least, offhand I can't think of one). Additionally, the ones which launched much later and stuck around have relied on the popularity of supporting media (like YGO) so they're not great examples (and, of course, it's worth remembering that the longest-running active media-backed CCG is Pokemon, which launched in 1998, uses resource cards)
---

Maybe try EDH TC.
It's a variant on mtg that is more slower and casual where you have a card you always have access to as your commander. You can build a deck based on your commander and "always" have access to them.

It's also a lot more forgiving towards new players and bad draws because it's a multi player free for all.
There's also only one of each card allowed in your deck, so your opponents can't just swords to plowshares all your cards every turn.

Btw, 20% of matches do not come down to luck, or at least didn't.

Things may have changed drastically, but I played when the game was pretty new, and the level of skill between players could be drastic.

This was over 20 years ago now, but I had a large group of friends (30+), of which about 12 played MtG. Even within that group skill level varied greatly. I never lost a game against David I don't think (not even one, not even with common decks vs his best etc), he just made too many mistakes, didn't make great decks etc.

Meanwhile I usually won the sealed deck tournaments at the local card shops. It's how I got all my cards. Over the 2 years we played or so, I spent $200 or so entering tournaments, and ended up with almost $3000 worth of cards.

Now, the game has been around along time, so the average skill of players has probably increased, but....i'm sure many of them still make mistakes or don't see the best way to play their cards every time. Land as long as you don't do something crazy, should not make a huge impact in your strategy, especially if you play it safe.

Back in the day there was lots of ways to protect against land problems, and I'm sure there are still today (probably even more).

I should probably get back into playing MtG in real life (played the virtual version but wasn't the same), since I'm playing DnD again. It was fun, and it's a good way to socialize. Kinda have my hands full between video games and dnd right now though.
---