Would it be possible to make a trading card game so balanced it would make netdecking stupid and impractical?

Only by making it no longer a trading card game in any meaningful sense.
This. The only way to make netdecking "stupid and impractical" is to make it so that any particular configuration of cards will be expected to perform as well as any other. As long as it is possible to actually build a deck which will have an advantage over other decks, netdecking will exist.

If somehow you managed that people still be going online to study strategy and lines of play. Look at the type of study games like Chess, Shogi, and Go have gotten over the years, even a symmetrical game doesn't negate utility of study in improving your success rate.

People "netdeck" everything that implies multiple choices. I've seen build guides for single-player roguelike mobile games. So no.
Just go play bridge.

The only thing that would make netdecking impractical is if all the challenge of the game is in the tactics rather than the strategy.
But deck-building games are based around strategy, so if that's the case it's no longer a deck-building game. The question is fundamentally flawed.

Unless there's an extremely limited card pool, there will always be certain archetypes that will be more popular than others.

The strongest of these archetypes, and the associated counter-archetypes will always lead to netdecking.

You get netdecking even with a card pool consisting of two cards, as there would be an optimal ratio.

Would it really be Netdecking when the combinations are so limited and obvious though?

Netdecking is the symptom of a competitive meta developing, and shouldn't be regarded in and of itself as unhealthy for a game.

If a competitive game is good, someone will come up with a good deck. If that decks is good and wins shit, then other people will seek success by copying that deck, and tweaking it to their own style.

Netdecking also creates a starting point for new players getting into the game. It shows them what cards and combos and other things are effective, and how the game works.

Sure, netdecking can get out of hand, and in a CCG, ca create a huge barrier of entry, but that doesn't mean it's 100% bad, all the time.

There would be math involved, so sure.

THe thing to understand about netdecking is this: it gives bad players advice on how to build good decks. A good deck will ALWAYS consist of cards that have broad use, with a small portion of the deck being cards with more narrow focus and stronger effects. Often that last group is counters for shit that's prevelent in the meta because it's so damn usefull.

A bad player will not know when to play a card and when to hold on to it. Through netdecking, and exploring some basic concepts, a CG player can learn to judge the value of cards against other cards, the Vanilla test and so on. But only experience and skill can teach you the value of WHEN to play. It's like a person in chess who brings his Queen out too early and just looses the piece.

Netdeckers will always be one step behind. The pattern is thus: Current Meta dominates. Dude finds right balance of cards that, with high level play, can eat the current meta for breakfast. A few savvy individuals take note of the deck he plays and make adjustments to theirs. These decks get out on the net. Netdeckers start to make life difficult for the people still playing the current meta. The netdecks then become the NEW current meta, and the cycle repeats.

Its more than, unlike other boards, Veeky Forums generally deals in topics that have simple, logical answers.

/a/ will make some kind of subjective thread about an imagined best girl. /co/ will make threads about steven universe or some other show of the week.

But Veeky Forums threads that ask questions usually have pretty straightforward answers that are easily shown to be right.

Oh fuck it's loss

You could sort of do it by making an objective system similar to Malifaux. In Malifaux, you declare a faction and then randomly determine objectives. After this determined you build lists to counter what you think your opponent is going to do and also to handle the objectives that can range from "kill a dude" to "hold a point" to "purposely try to get a specific unit of yours killed." Sure not all units in each faction are equally useful, but some do better than other depending on that current game's particular factors.

Mind you in order to replicate this in card form you'd need to really depart from the standard Magic ripoff game.

>now, you have here in the illushtrashion, a lacanian diagram of "loss" *sniff* in the adoleschent unconschiouschness

>Would it be possible to make a trading card game so balanced it would make netdecking stupid and impractical?

Absolutely.

Deck contents are mandated by the rules, and all decks are identical. What matters is what you draw and order you play the cards in. If there's no deck construction aspect, there can be no netdecking.

Players are, of course, absolutely free to trade cards between themselves, thus fulfilling the requirement of it being a "trading card game".

this game is too postmodern for me

He just described a deckbuilding game but with trading houserules.

>postmodern
Please don't use words you don't know the meaning of

lol that was hilarious dude.

Veeky Forums has a long running quest devoted to best girls

Veeky Forums makes threads about every piece of pop culture as a thinly veiled STAT ME

Veeky Forums will argue for years about elves existing.

But those all have simple and logical single post answers.
>Fuck off
>Fuck off
and
>Depends on the setting

Veeky Forums has disagreed with your stance for years. Return to whatever degenerate unpopular shitpile you came from.

Quests have been hated for years, Stat Me threads that derail into off topic shit have always been cancer, and "Depends on the setting" continues to be a real answer to people who don't put thought into their posts. People still reply after the answer has been given, but that doesn't mean that the answers aren't simple. Have fun trying to argue that all of Veeky Forums agrees with you, because obviously we're a hivemind.

**Nice to another zizek poster here**

I fucked those actual quotes up, I have to reformat my settings

Yes. Buy a Bicycle deck of cards and trade with your friends.

Tower Girls, you're proven wrong.

"Stat me" evolved into "How would a campaign work with" or "General". I mean, go look at the Star Trek General. Its just whining about decades old TV series.

"Depends on the setting" is a nonanswer that effects no one.

>President is actually the highest form of TCG

>Rock Paper Scissors doesn't have an optimal strategy
Let your opponent go first.
ezpz.

Oh shit, I guess you actually do speak for all of Veeky Forums. I wish our appointed spokesman was smarter and could make a coherent argument.

>Implying

Go to a smarter board then

Sure, as soon as there is one.
If you've ever been to Veeky Forums for any real period of time you won't say Veeky Forums

*Sigh*... I’ve grimed up all of these threads and they still don’t catch fire no matter what I do. I guess I should try Reddit instead...

> Haha... no need to hit rock bottom just yet!

>Implying
Netdecking puts less eyes on a single problem because it makes it so people dont have to think about the problem.

Who are you?

> Your trolling just needs a little help, and you can get it with the power of Oxymoron’s newest product, OXYMORON user SALT!

> With OXYMORON user SALT, you’ll be able to derail any thread, silly or serious!

No, seriously, who are you?

> You see, with other user salt, you just get ignored, and your thread ends up on Page 8 in a heartbeat.

But with OXYMORON user SALT, YOU CAN POUR MORE!

> In fact, with its mixture of /qst/, magical realm, and skud, along with a pinch of /pol/...

> You’re guaranteed to start fires that make a Californian summer look like a candlelit dinner!

Look, all I want to know is who you are, and what you’re doong messing up my thread.

And it’s called ‘skub,’ dumb shit.

> See how fast it works?

This is objectively wrong.

Just because there's mountains of retards just assembling other people's work doesn't mean that there aren't thriving communities of people breaking down the game and tearing through its various moving parts to optimize.

I honestly can't tell if you're attempting to troll/shitpost or if you're just plain butthurt.

>See how fast it works?

> Just remember, when you need a thread derailed, there’s no substitute for OXYMORON user SALT: FOR ANONS AS DENSE AS AN OX!

That’s it, I’m getting a mod.

Hey this is semi related.

I have been recently (finally) getting in to Commander/EDH. Know what I've discover it most consists of? Net decked...

Playing a 60 card deck? 24 ish land are you are good. Ramp if that's your strategy, run less lands if it's not.

100 EDH? You run damn near 36ish Land ALL THE TIME. You run Sol Ring, and Alpha lands. Shock lands, Filter lands ALL THE TIME. You run 10 ish non-land mana source ALL THE TIME and you best be running These certain ones in these colors. These ones in these colors, and these ones in these colors.
Your only escape is mono-color. Sorry did I say escape? Allow my to introduce the mono utility lands you run ALL THE TIME.
Lands done? Good. Who your commander? Doesn't matter, what colors are you using? Ok, make sure to include THESE staples that are in your colors or stop playing EDH. Also you are running Tops and Greeves all of the time, or you are bad.
That leaves you with 20ish cards including your commander to "pick what you want."

Holy fuck in the supposed more fun and flexible format I have never felt more restrictive than my legacy decks, and despite having a deck nearly twice the size of other formats I seem to have damn near half the choices.

Thus far in my limited experience of 4ish decks (and copious reading), the Commander format has felt the most Net-deck-the-format... and I thought modern was bad.

>No I'm not giving up on EDH yet, or down-crying it completely, but lets just say my first impressions are not great.

>Thus far in my limited experience of 4ish decks
Most EDH players have 6+ decks.

Maybe you should go to a single FNM event and tell us how Standard works

I disagree on some points about EDH. I DO agree that there are set-in-stone picks for your decks in regards to lands and mana-rocksI DO agree that some decks just function better than others, and that keeps me from playing it tryhard competitive. I DON’T agree that you’re restricted on your decisions simply because of cost efficiency in a vacuum. See what your local players are building, and build your deck how you want with that in mind.

I built a Mogis discard/burn two weeks ago and won my first match with it because I shoved a few grave-purge cards in it (Rakdos Charm, Nihil Spellbomb, Bojuka Bog) and it controlled all the graveyard recursion everyone had brought to the table.

>falling for goodstuff.dec meme

Unless your group is super-competitive (lel), you can play and win with the jankiest jank that has ever janked. The trick to commander is to not overextend and not turn it into the game of Archenemy.

>20 cards
Nibba, even with most "properly" built commander:
>35-40 lands
>5 boardwipes
>5 ST removal
>5-10 draw
>5 mana rocks/ramp

you are left with 35-45 thematic cards, and that's more than enough. AND in most colors you'll be tweaking or omitting something from above categories.

No, but it is the king of inane question threads.

These answers apply to pretty much every thread on Veeky Forums, which is both sad and hilarious.

Eh, whaddya gonna do? It’s Veeky Forums.

10/10

What if not all, but most of it? Kinda like infinity compared to warhammer 40k

I’d like to direct your attention to Android: Netrunner.

You are dumb m8.

If you created a game that was so balanced you wouldn't need netdecking you'd either have developer dictated decks, in which case you may as well make an LCG instead of a TCG, or all of your cards are so generic and underpowered that you're basically making the same card mechanically with different flavor, see the Trigger cards in Vanguard.

OP here, I confirm.

I don't think netdecking itself is the issue here, it's an unvaried meta.
When the top 8 of a tourny has only 2 decks, there's clearly an issue. I've a particular game in mind that's had this issue recently, and it is not fun.
On the other hand, I've seen times in other games where there's a large enough card pool with decent enough balance that there's around 10 decks floating around. They're still clearly netdecked, but there's enough viable decks that there's still a variety.