it'd be nice if the PvP system didnt pit my score 300 deck agaisnt a score 6000

[bowdown2q]

agreed with the last post. I just ran a 38 score deck against a SEVEN THOUSAND.

[bowdown2q]

it'd be nice if the PvP system didn't pit my score 300 deck against a score 6000 deck. is there way that, say, I can avoid loosing my 20 of 300 coins in a fight I CANT POSSIBLY WIN and am penalized for backing out of? Maybe, oh, i don't know... making the PvP system look for players only with, say X% of your score? +/-100%? even 300% i might still have a chance at, but when I'm put against somebody literally TEN TIMES my score, how am I supposed to have a snowball's chance? I can't compete when you can put out an elite dragon on turn 2 and the best card I have is a rare weapon.

[bowdown2q]

yeah, learning is one thing, and having a great draw is another. But I CAN NOT beat a deck when ALL of their mana is towers. That's just a waste of my time to try.

[EmilyMoby]

I agree that this would be helpful, but it's possible that there might not be enough players to satisfy a specific score request like this. It's not ideal, but there is always the option of building a rainbow and grinding the false gods until you get enough upgraded cards to feel like you can play on more even footing with players with higher scores.

[lestat1]

thats how you learn from players withbetter decks. You see what they do and you build your own decks with combos to your liking thats how i learned anyway.

[Scaredgirl]

Yeah, PvP system needs to change. Killing newbies with a fully upgraded deck is boring and I actually feel bad in doing so. It's almost like robbing people with a gun or something.

GW has a perfect system for this. If there is no opponent with similar rank, it keeps looking and looking. The more time it keeps looking, the bigger the rank difference can be, meaning that after a while any opponent will do.

I'd much rather wait for a while than to fight newbies.

[SnDance]

Learning is nice, but still, it would be nice to be matched against someone who has a score relatively close to yours.

[SnDance]

Maybe if we could request a certain score. Like, we go into the PvP, and chose "Decks withing 1000", or "Decks within 100". Or "Any Deck". Something like that, so we can chose who we fight relative to score.

[Uncle Jellyfish]

I was playing my Speed Rainbow in a PvP match, and I got pitted up against a Fire deck. The owner of the deck had 7 wins and 1 loss. His score was below 100, mine was ~27,000. I lost the match because he rain of fired twice.

It's not impossible to beat people with higher scores, and if they are playing their God Farming decks in PvP (I see those a lot), they are even easier to exploit and defeat.

[Forfeit]

Lol, (I know this urza's name, not the one from Mt:G, no clue what that even means) okay, you know what I just realized about my last post. I proved the point of this whole topic. How fair is it to not click t50, and stilll face t50?

[Forfeit]

Well, I agree that this needs to be fixed, however... PvP scales score based on the difference in both players scores. Doing anything automatic where players are pitted against others like them would ruin a bit of the score gaining.

P.S. When I was first playing this game, before even being on the boards, I fought a random match with Cisco. I lost. However it was a fun match, I saw ways in which my deck could've won, and it was close. And I had no idea who Cisco was. I tend not to look at scores often.

P.P.S. Mainly, just keep a random match button along-side everything else we want to see added.

[Uncle Jellyfish]

P.S. When I was first playing this game, before even being on the boards, I fought a random match with Cisco. I lost. However it was a fun match, I saw ways in which my deck could've won, and it was close. And I had no idea who Cisco was. I tend not to look at scores often.

OFF TOPIC:
When I first started playing, I PvPed against uzra, lol. I think I won that match, but I do remember commenting on how his name sounded like Urza from Mt:G. o-o