Forum:Why Does Everyone Use The Same Decks?

So, I decided to download Devpro, just so I could actually play some games. It was here I realized that almost everyone uses the same exact decks. Now, I am familiar with this, as whenever you allow people to get anything they want, (Example: Pokemon Showdown allowing for the use of pokemon and moves that are near impossible to have gotten normally unless you somehow had almost every pokemon game in existence, beaten all of them, and got every event/ bonus) almost everyone immediately goes for the most "unfair", or as you might call them, "powerful" things, which in this case are cards.

So, the question is: why? I love winning just as much as anyone else. In fact, it's what drives me to do most things. But I still use the cards I like, the cards I like being the only archetype I've used since I got back into this game. So, I do not understand how almost every person who likes a game would use the same exact things. Everyone has likes and dislikes. When someone is so overcome by wanting to win that they choose only the best things, no matter how much they may dislike them, then they do not show who they are, they just become a faceless being, mindless, using the same strategy as everyone else. What happens when two people with the same archetype fight? I imagine it is not fun, but overlap is inevitable when this happens.

Okay, so example time. I just went on a rant. Did you like it? Are you bored yet? Are you wondering why I would use pokemon as an example? Because in this case, the metagame has actual, tiers. Yugioh can, but the number of cards makes it harder. Instead, you might have staples. Or if you use an archetype(similar to rain/sun teams) You, or others, might call some cards in the set "bad". So, you all are making each other use the same cards, even in an archetype, by shaming each other for not using the right cards/ having a bad deck. Ok, next example.
 * 1: Jim enjoys pokemon. One day, he discovers smogon (the website for the pokemon "metagame" that I strongly dislike for its stupidity/conformist attitude, also most people follow it).  His favorite pokemon is dunsparce, but dunsparce is ranked in nu (neverused, originally the lowest tier).  When he uses a simulator, his dunsparce cannot help due to the fact that everyone in ou (overused, the second highest tier before ubers, the tier with all the super strong mons) uses the pokemon ranked higher (in this case, higher means "better", which is not always the case).  You see, all tiers are based off of usage. Does that ring a bell?  So, the more people who use the same pokemon, the higher it gets. The higher it gets, the more people who originally ignored it want to use it.  So, Jim, not wanting to lose so often, replaces the pokemon he likes with those that are the "strongest".  Then, he increases their usage, and the cycle continues.
 * 2: Jim the 2nd, Jim's illegitimate child, accidently falls in the family aging machine and becomes an adult. Then, he decides to play yugioh.  He originally uses, hm, let's say Guardian, because they remind him of the tools he uses to assassinate dignitaries (his day job is as a cyber assassin.).  He soon finds himself getting stomped by judgement dragon, bls, and chaos sorcerer, likely at the same time.  Like his father, this constant loss pushes him to want to win.  He then improves his Guardian deck and wins more games.  That last sentence was a lie.  In fact, he begins to use bls himself!  Then, he slowly begins to pick up more and more cards that are used the most.  Then, he hazes (I think that might me the only word appropriate) the next player he comes across with his lightdoll deck.  Then that player gets the overused cards.  Then then they haze another player into the game, likely while insulting or criticizing their deck, either during or after the game. Then this all happens again.

The point I'm trying to show here is that by doing nothing but weighting in on decks by lazily recommending the least fair cards (you might call them best) cards, nitpicking, or flat out criticizing the strength of a deck, you are not helping anyone. What you are doing is making the game less diverse, and warding new players off. So, next time you recommend something, think about what kind of card it is, and if it really is fun to use for anyone that plays it. Next time you say something about how someone who made a unique deck, think about if you ever made a deck that strayed off of recommendations. Finally, if think about it before you call something bad, because look: nothing is truly bad, and everything can work well if done right. Card games are not a puzzle where everyone has to fit the same pieces together to win. They are games of endless possibility, and people should be given free reign to discover their own styles of play. Bashfrog (talk • contribs) 13:46, October 26, 2014 (UTC)Idiotfrog