How do you rate decks that beat you ?

[Rainchild]

I don't need noo steenking thumbs...  ;-)

[mwaetht]

I thumbs down decks if I can guess how they work based only on their mark, their oracle card, and what they do on the first and second turns.

Now it could just be me, but I'm not sure I've seen many decks at all that you can thumbs up with this rule, its pretty easy to guess what a deck does based on the first two turns 99% of the time. The only decks I'm seeing are ones with the wrong quanta balance that don't play their cards until turn 3+. So... you thumbs up decks for quanta inefficiency?

Most strategies that aren't as obvious as a brick to the head aren't easily predicted. For example:

Light pillars, Mark of Air, Oracle Card Pegasus: Duh. Pegasus rush.

The general consensus on this thread seems to be that such a deck would be thumbs-upped, because it's not overdone to death like, say, Ghostmare is. I would thumbs-down it, because while it's not overdone, it doesn't show creativity. If it turns out the deck is actually an unupped flying Morning Glory deck with Pegasus splashed in, for example, that probably wouldn't be evident in the first two turns. I would thereby give it a thumbs up.

[Brontos]

Got Voodoo Doll yesterday. Done a random melting pot deck with every cards that is good with the doll, got 6/0 and only 2 thumbs up. It's better than my usual of 0, but still, this deck is just so original... I don't know how to persuade people to give thumbs up more.

[Elite arbiter]

I thumbs down decks if I can guess how they work based only on their mark, their oracle card, and what they do on the first and second turns.

Now it could just be me, but I'm not sure I've seen many decks at all that you can thumbs up with this rule, its pretty easy to guess what a deck does based on the first two turns 99% of the time. The only decks I'm seeing are ones with the wrong quanta balance that don't play their cards until turn 3+. So... you thumbs up decks for quanta inefficiency?

Most strategies that aren't as obvious as a brick to the head aren't easily predicted. For example:

Light pillars, Mark of Air, Oracle Card Pegasus: Duh. Pegasus rush.

The general consensus on this thread seems to be that such a deck would be thumbs-upped, because it's not overdone to death like, say, Ghostmare is. I would thumbs-down it, because while it's not overdone, it doesn't show creativity. If it turns out the deck is actually an unupped flying Morning Glory deck with Pegasus splashed in, for example, that probably wouldn't be evident in the first two turns. I would thereby give it a thumbs up.

I can understand that distinction really, and I see and approve of the thought process behind what you're approving of, but not necessarily sure I agree with the results. I guess it depends how specific you mean when you say "know" what the deck does for its strategy. Because honestly I wouldn't make much of any distinction between "Flying Glories with Pegasi" and "Buffed Pegasi", partly because I consider both Flying Glories and Buffed Pegasi to be part-decks rather than complete deck themes.

For example, I could tell this Water Mark Forest Scorpion deck I fought before the match started "Mono-Life with Forest Spectre", but seeing Pendulums on the first turn it got amended to "Mono-life with forest spectre and a couple Water cards. Typical really, I had it figured out by turn 1-2, so by your strategy it wouldn't get a thumbs up. But it had a really neat strategy involving Pufferfish and Nymph's tears as the water cards and did really well. So despite knowing what the deck would do from the word go, I gave it a thumbs up. Although you'd probably say I didn't know 'exactly' what it'd do, I had a pretty good idea even before I knew about the pufferfish nymphs tears to AdrenaNynmph.

[nolf]

Sorry that I have to ask this, but how do you find out how many thumbs up/down your arena deck gets?

I'd also like to add that if you want to thumb up/down "fairly" (based on originality) you have to consider the oracle card and that you probably won't see all of the opponent's deck. My last oracle card was devonian dragon - five of those roughly need ten time pillars, it's tough to make anything original starting from that, for me anyway. It reeks of mono time, it actually wasn't, I added a few darkness pendulums, nightmare (I admit) and devourers so it wouldn't be mono time. Still, chances are some only got to see time quanta/cards, for some it maybe felt like a boring Ghostmare deck though it wasn't really (two of each in a 40 card deck, I think).

Also, as somebody rightfully pointed out - I am in the gold league but I lack a lot of cards across the board (and won't buy them just to make an arena deck), let alone upgraded cards, of which I have far too few. And that limits my deck building greatly. I avoid the overused decks I myself encounter too much, I try to give people a bit of a challenge so I test my decks a few times to see if they work at all and that's the best I can offer.

[Calindu]

People are quite happy when you get a good card for a deck and don't make it.
My fire pendulum DC style deck got lots of thumbs up.

[Qohelet]

Why this deck don't get any thumb up's ?



Is it lame or what? There is not black holes or phase shields. I think this deck is pretty weak (I don't know how to make good flying weapon decks, is it possible?)

[mesaprotector]

Why this deck don't get any thumb up's ?

Is it lame or what? There is not black holes or phase shields. I think this deck is pretty weak (I don't know how to make good flying weapon decks, is it possible?)

It's more creative than most rainbows I've seen, with nice quanta balance... I probably would have thumbed it up. Sometimes it's just luck, like the Wings/Recluse deck I submitted that got 2/8 thumbs up, or maybe your opponent doesn't like antimatters. (It is one of the more irritating cards to play against, unless you have Rewind or Mutation.)

[puri1]

It's been said, but Aetherstall is an absolute thumbs down for me. Even if it's well put together, it doesn't matter. It still shows lack of originality and thought, and I got real mad when I saw one in Silver. By that point, aetherstall should be used only (if at all) as a FG farmer. Seriously, by Silver League you should be more creative than that.

Most other decks, even ghostmares, get a thumbs up if they were well made or utilized the Oracle Card well and thumbs down if they won due to dumb luck or if they completely ignore the oracle card and just made a generic build.

[Elite arbiter]

@Qohelet: I'm not sure either, it seems pretty original to me. But to a lot of people the mere use of SNova period is an automatic thumbs-down regardless of anything else. I don't agree with that position, but there you go.

@Puri1: Correct me if I'm wrong, but your post specifically implies that Ghostmare, and more generally, Generic Novabows firestalls and SoSa Poison Stalls, don't have a lack of originality and thought, since they don't get an automatic thumbs down like Aetherstall.

Side question, is it Mono Aether you have a problem with, or any stall that uses Dimensional Shields en masse that triggers your rage? Regardless of whatever else the deck does, since Aetherstall actually can be a multitude of deck types depending on the other half of the duo.

[Qohelet]

@Qohelet: I'm not sure either, it seems pretty original to me. But to a lot of people the mere use of SNova period is an automatic thumbs-down regardless of anything else. I don't agree with that position, but there you go.

It's now 8-3 and gained 60 electrum, so there is two thumb up's \o/

Talking about supernova: Supernova is not always good thing, deck with black holes will own you by healing itself LOT. It's most powerful
anti-rainbow card at the moment and add few rewinds to get more angry faces ><

[Qohelet]

Oracle gave me electrocutor, so I can make another flying weapon deck with that. Let's do test, if this get single one thumb up, I don't get it.
(and this is even weaker deck, imo)