Hey there! I'm new to paper MTG and play Commander with my playgroup. We've been having a debate about whether the total value of a deck really indicates how strong it is. One of my friends argues that value doesn't equal strength, but I can't help but wonder when I keep losing to a deck with a higher price tag than mine.
I've been playing 1v1 games with my friend for a few months now, so I know their deck almost as well as mine. It can be frustrating when I can predict their moves but still can't win with my basic deck. I understand the point that a couple of expensive cards in a deck won't guarantee a win, but when a deck is upgraded with so many pricey cards, it feels like a whole different ball game.
For reference, we both started with precons, and both upgraded. I spent $20, they spent $120+. Inputing my deck list in a deck value calculator returns $103, which is lower than their upgrade alone lol
I don't mind losing when the match is good. I hate losing when I'm always on the backfoot and can't do much besides hoping to survive another turn
What are your thoughts on this? I'd love to hear different perspectives on the relationship between deck value and strength in the game.
edit: I received more responses than I expected, so I'll need some time to go through them all and respond. Thank you in advance!
There’s definitely a substantial positive relationship between deck value and performance. Rare cards aren’t valuable merely because they’re rare. They’re valuable because they’re rare and they’re strong, often being either way more efficient than more common cards, or having rare or unique properties. The correlation isn’t 1:1 because a given deck’s win condition is based on the emergent properties of the deck when cards combine, which is why pauper decks can be surprisingly strong, but if the difference is large enough and the deck is constructed halfway competently, it’s going to be much more powerful.
This is a feature, not a bug. MTG’s business model is to sell booster packs. People buy booster packs for the rare cards, either to put them in their own competitive decks, or to sell/trade them for other cards so that they can build competitive decks. If the rare cards weren’t objectively more powerful, there would be no need for them, and it wouldn’t drive the kind of massive premiums for them in the card market.
Obviously you can’t just look at the value of the cards to get the value of the deck as a whole, but $20 vs $120 is a big gap. Deck value doesn’t equal strength, but it’s highly correlated. MTG isn't pay-to-win, per se, but spending more money on cards will give you better cards, without question. Competitive players spend what they need to spend to build a competitive deck, so at that level it becomes all about skill, and spending way more than your opponent isn’t necessarily an advantage, not to mention that certain types of decks fare better against others. At the level you’re talking about, though, the extra $100 is going to make a massive difference. It would be embarrassing for your friend if he wasn’t beating your $20 deck with his $120 deck.
Hey, thanks for the reply!
So, after taking into account another comment, I did some calculations and it turns out my upgrades are worth around $25 while theirs are closer to $75. I might have missed a few of their cards since I didn't have the exact upgrade list on hand, but that's the general idea.
Oh, and I totally forgot to mention that neither of us really splurged on lands. I grabbed a few for $3 total, but they didn't bother since their deck didn't really need them. So, no fancy, expensive cards that don't really add much to the gameplay.
The difference in card value isn't as drastic as I originally thought, but I've been finding it tough to come out on top in our matches lately. Back when we were both using stock precons, things felt more evenly matched. Now I'm just hoping to survive another turn, every turn after their engine starts/
Their upgrade was pretty straightforward compared to mine, which could have been a bit more focused. Plus, their deck is a bit easier to play with
One thing I alluded to is that some decks do simply work better against other decks. Value aside, it might be that their deck and the way it works is a natural counter to yours. If you haven't read much about how the game works, this is an old but still excellent writeup:
https://boardgamegeek.com/thread/370207/what-i-know-about-magic-gathering
I haven't played Commander so this may not apply 1:1, but all of this is broadly applicable regardless of the format. Forgive me if you're already familiar with this stuff, but you said you're new to things and this is what really helped me get my head around the game when I started playing.