Reducing Max Deck Size to 80 Cards + Hero in QM

[qaz92zaq]

I honestly don't think this will make much difference. The people that prefer 120 decks will get the exact same benefits of not milling out or making tough cuts at 80. I think this will only accomplish annoying people that really like playing super fat decks.

PS.
Just to address that 60 cards makes mill too viable, I'd be very surprised about that. Mill is meant to target the majority of competitive decks that run close to 40 cards. The exact size of the minority of decks probably doesn't matter too much. It should alos be noted that while 60 cards does not sound like that many more than 40 it is about twice as hard to mill out because in a normal game you draw about 20 cards from your deck, so it menas there is a 40 card buffer opposed to a 20 card buffer. Though I'd honestly be against this change too.

[Gondorian]

I honestly don't think this will make much difference. The people that prefer 120 decks will get the exact same benefits of not milling out or making tough cuts at 80. I think this will only accomplish annoying people that really like playing super fat decks.

Making a deck 1/3 of the size won't make much difference? It's quite easy to get up to 80 cards without thinking nowadays. It's only 4 copies of 20 different cards. Each hero has about 250 cards they could put in any deck now.

[Veles]

Praxix sux

My main issue with overly fat decks is their advantage over trimmer midrange/control decks just because the card number. To some that is ok and falls under deckbuilding skills/meta reads, to me it is unfair advantage. Looks ugly design vise.

[qaz92zaq]

Making a deck 1/3 of the size won't make much difference? It's quite easy to get up to 80 cards without thinking nowadays. It's only 4 copies of 20 different cards. Each hero has about 250 cards they could put in any deck now.

My point is 80 cards is so many already 80 v 120 is actually very minimal especially when you consider going through 60 cards in either deck basically never happens

Sure 120 is more extreme but the principle is the same

[jonmaciel]

To some that is ok and falls under deckbuilding skills/meta reads, to me it is unfair advantage. Looks ugly design vise.

I agree with this. It does look ugly to see certain decks win because they have more cards and thats the only reason.

[qwertzy]

I vote no,but im curious why reduce deck size.Because of mill or stall?80 cards millstalker can stall you equally or even better then 120 cards,80 cards praxis is better for mill.So what else is the reason?Since lower deck size is almost allways better.

[Gondorian]

I vote no,but im curious why reduce deck size.Because of mill or stall?80 cards millstalker can stall you equally or even better then 120 cards,80 cards praxis is better for mill.So what else is the reason?Since lower deck size is almost allways better.

The explanation is in the OP.

[Gondorian]

It currently looks like the community is split, but there is a while to go on the poll.

For those who voted no, I am interested in why.

Q: Do you like piloting 80+ card decks?

Q: Do you like facing 80+ card decks?

Q: Are you voting on behalf of other people who might like piloting/facing 80+ card decks?

If one or both of the first two apply, please can you elaborate here.

If it's the latter, then please can you bring this thread to their attention, so we can get their input.

[paxvobiscum]

I voted no because i like variety in decks, even if they are mill or stall.
I think a 80 + deck has little chance vs a fine tuned 39 + hero because of consistency.
In my experience advantage depends more on mus that in size of the deck.

For your last Questions these are my replies:

R: I have 2x 80 + decks, i tried them to learn another way of playing and deckbuilding and (in case of moonstaller) to counter them. I have also a praxix 60 that i rarely use, but back in time i enjoyed.

R: If i teched correctly i laugh when i face similar decks. Usually i'm faster than those, cause only some good players can pilot them well. (never heard of shadowmann?)

R: No.

Hope that would help.

[Gondorian]

I voted no because i like variety in decks, even if they are mill or stall.
I think a 80 + deck has little chance vs a fine tuned 39 + hero because of consistency.
In my experience advantage depends more on mus that in size of the deck.

For your last Questions these are my replies:

R: I have 2x 80 + decks, i tried them to learn another way of playing and deckbuilding and (in case of moonstaller) to counter them. I have also a praxix 60 that i rarely use, but back in time i enjoyed.

R: If i teched correctly i laugh when i face similar decks. Usually i'm faster than those, cause only some good players can pilot them well. (never heard of shadowmann?)

R: No.

Hope that would help.

Yes, that does help. Thank you.

I think your skill level in playing and deckbuilding (likely in top 5%) doesn't make it a problem for you.

What I'm concerned about is the majority of the player-base (of which half of all players are, by definition, below the mean/median average ability), so their decks won't be tuned or teched as well as yours and they won't know the right things to do to end the game fast enough before they run out of cards. They will simply lose to a person of similar ability because the other person ran more cards, and each game they start where the other deck is three times as big will be a depressing experience for them.