Forum:The problem with side-decking...

Many claim that the Side-Deck helps to compete with other, stronger Decks but that's where I personally see a big issue: No matter how good of a duelist you are, or how good your Deck is, an opponent who just happens to have the right cards in his Side-Deck will win nevertheless.

I know many will disagree with me, but I think that this takes away alot of skill from the game. Instead of building your Deck to counter potential threats, you can just store these counter-measures in your Side-Deck. Also, it occurrred very often to me that I utterly obliterated my opponent Game 1 but due to his sided-in Skill Drain and Makro Cosmos, I was unable to play the rest of the Match properly, as these cards cripple Decks completely.

Now some of you might think "Well, you also have the option to Side-Deck cards to counter your opponent". Of course I do. But do I want to dedicate my entire Side-deck to countering popular Decks, like most people do? No, I would much rather throw in cards that would fit my Deck without being too obvious, to spice up things if you will. Also, when both players sided, it becomes more the "whoever-draws-the-card-that-wrecks-the-opponents-strategy-first-wins" routine.

In my opinion, there should be Tournaments where Side-Decking is not allowed. To balance this, a stricter Ban List, created by Players and not Konami, could be applied. With this, the overpowered Decks, that could previously only be defeated by siding heavily, would basically become unplayable. This seems radical, but it would help the balancing and the creativity in this game greatly.

What do you think? --BronzeJohnson (talk • contribs) 19:14, August 1, 2014 (UTC)

You want this to stop being a thing because you don't want to use it like everyone else. That is an entirely selfish reason. Jet-Black Nova (talk • contribs) 19:25, August 1, 2014 (UTC)

No Side-Decking decreases skill. When you're going into a tourney, now you're hoping, "Jeez, I hope I mained the right cards to deal with the other Decks." Side Decking gives you the ability to combat other Decks that would otherwise overwhelm yours, giving you a "second chance" to redeem yourself. And yes, this goes the other way, adding in cards to further overwhelm your opponent.

If there was no Side-Decking, and you were facing a Deck that your Main-Decked "countering" cards can't handle, it's pretty much "gg" for you, because you're now screwed with your permanent Main-Decked countering cards.

Side Decking also allows for the fun strategy of changing your Deck's set-up, replacing 15 cards that changes your Deck's entire strategy. So don't complain that Side-Decking has no "skill".--UltimateKuriboh (talk • contribs) 19:28, August 1, 2014 (UTC)

I agree with UltimateKuriboh. If them siding cards to counter you is a problem, side counter cards to that. They use Macro Cosmos or Dimensional Fissure? Side Imperial Iron Wall. Light/Shadow Imprisoning Mirror? A simple Royal Decree or extra spell/trap removal. You cite the Side Deck as a skill crutch, but it's far more useful and important tool than you choose to believe. Jet-Black Nova (talk • contribs) 19:38, August 1, 2014 (UTC)

So I'm supposed to side against typical Side-Deck cards? I have to include cards that counter my opponent and counter his potential counters? For that the 15 card limit is just far too narrow. I know there's some cards that are good for both but it is still very difficult, especially if you want to cover as many different dangers as possible.

I'm not saying that it should cease to exist but that I, along with many others, would welcome the option to participate in tournaments where noone uses Side-Decks. It might be true that it gives you a second chance but only being able to win because you side-in the right cards that specifically counter your opponent feels wrong to me. It just doesn't feel like I won the Duel because of my skills but because of one or two cheap cards. --BronzeJohnson (talk • contribs) 20:12, August 1, 2014 (UTC)

If that's the case, then play singles. People who want to have a better win percentage often play singles using Exodia Decks, Chain Burn Decks, and Dark World Decks. Now give me a consistent Deck that can deal with all 3 Decks simultaneously by using Main-Decked counters for those Decks. Oh, you can't because that would stretch your Deck too thin, and thus ruin archetype-based Decks. --UltimateKuriboh (talk • contribs) 20:18, August 1, 2014 (UTC)

I actually prefer to play singles. The problem is that there are no tournaments that support singles. --BronzeJohnson (talk • contribs) 20:32, August 1, 2014 (UTC)

That's because singles are more luck-based than any other dueling format. If you happen to go up against an opponent whose deck counters yours, you're screwed. With a side deck, you're able to swap out the less useful cards for better ones. Jet-Black Nova (talk • contribs) 20:35, August 1, 2014 (UTC)

And now we reach the heart of the matter. Singles have lesser skill, because lesser Decks can get lucky hands and that wins them the game, as opposed to matches, where if you get a lucky hand 1 game, you might not get it in the next game or 2. Players who rely mostly on luck play singles, since that gives them a higher win percentage. Players who rely mostly on skill play matches, since if your opponent gets lucky in 1 Duel, that won't necessarily determine the match. This topic is now essentially invalidated, coming from you, since you believe in luck (singles) more than you do skill.

I understand that this is going to antagonize you. I just hope we can get along on other things. --UltimateKuriboh (talk • contribs) 20:41, August 1, 2014 (UTC)

Honestly, it does not antagonize me at all. I understand and respect your opinion. I just realised that I play mostly with my friends in Matches without siding, not just Singles. I somehow got them mixed up, sorry about that. --BronzeJohnson (talk • contribs) 21:39, August 1, 2014 (UTC)

The limits of the Side Deck actually force you to think of the counters that are most likely to appear, or what kinds of threats and/or counter-threats you're most likely to see in a tournament. It rewards paying attention to the metagame. In more casual formats where you're likely to see a greater variety of Decks, it becomes less potent because you'll eventually find a Deck that somehow creates a one-sided matchup regardless of what's being sided. --Gadjiltron (talk • contribs) 01:48, August 2, 2014 (UTC)