How many of you other realms members out there play the game and insist on your deck containing a specific character whenever you can make it so?

How many of you will simply play whatever it takes to win regardless of what team or character it requires?

Is this the fundamental difference that is separating casual ( as we are dubbed for wanting to enjoy the legend and lore of the game) from the pro ( as they are dubbed for their driving desire to win money and prizes through clever game play)?

I'm no pro, by any stretch, but I couldn't care less who's in my deck as long as it's good and fun.

So no, I don't think it's a fundamental difference between casual/pro or whatever. Why do we even have to have labels? Why can't we all just be VS. Enthusiasts.

Not necessarily.

Some casual players have a different "hook" than a specific character they enjoy playing.

The biggest thing that seperates a casual from a pro is priorities.

With anyone, winning is a priority.

However, priorities are, by their nature, hierarchal.

So, some casual players may have their priorities as:

(1) Play card X, because it doesn't see much play
(2) Not play Checkmate, because they see too much play
(3) Win with that deck

For example, I continually worked to make a viable Emperor Joker deck. Until Fiddler and Nenora were banned, I actually had one that decked on 5 and, using Fall of Oa, would then enable a Nenora/Fiddler fueled Nega Bomb to stall until 8 for the Joker win.

The first priority was to use Emperor Joker, the second priority was for the deck to be able to be competitive. If the first priority was to be competitive ... Emperor Joker wouldn't be in the deck.

Ultimately, most people have "having fun" as their goal, but the priorities are how they have fun.

For some, high level competition is fun and rewarding.

For others the challenge isn't from the "best of the best going head to head", but instead in the "making card X the best it can be".

And others just want to play the games for the reason that it was 'sold' to them ... playing their favorite characters. One friend of mine only wants to play the Arkham Inmates, because they are amongst his favorite characters.

I'm a casual player [especially for constructed]. However, I read a lot of comics, and have actually picked up some Marvel trades and comic series as a result of Vs. So, I either know, or get to know, most of the characters I play. Of course, I've played card games for some time now as well, so in other cases the 'comic book persona' goes away and the character's identity is based solely on the person in the card and his Vs. exploits.

This theory of gaming has existed for sometime and attempts to define the motivation of the player or players and ignores the defining factor of 'Pro' level gaming, which is skill level. Other then the random guys who show up at the PC and have someone hand them a deck, who doesn't build decks like the ones you described above? I belive the idea of 'Pro' and 'Casual' as the only two ways of being defined should be retired...

Is there truly only two types of players, or is it easier to be negative when there are only two options, 'us or them'?

Personally I wish we would do away with the term 'Pro' all together it reeks of irony at this point. It was originally used on this site to describe a group of players (who had equally crappy ideas) on the boards who would poo-poo on everyone's ideas and decks before the game had a defined metagame or any events had taken place. Then it was the term used for a very few guys who did well at the first few PCs. (Who now aren't around anymore or only show up to poo poo on UDE) Then it became the rallying cry of all of the players who counldn't get into the PC because the players who were Q'ed kept 'stealing their points'. Then it was the term for the players who tried too hard at the local events that some thought should be casual. It seems to be the name assigned, for the negative play exp. du jour.


I propose the difference between a 'Pro' and 'Casual' player is the skill level of the player in four different categories; Attitude, Card Evaluation, Deck Building, and/or Play Skill.

Attitude is the players goals in the game, and how they treat others.

Card Evaluation would cover the details of drafting/sealed play, set evaluation and understanding the uses of cards in specific metagames.

Deck Building sealed or constructed speaks for itself.

Play Skill is the ability to make more game winning decisions, than game losing decisions. Formation, reinforcement, when to attack for damage or pass for character advantedge, should I team attack or use my pump? Do you RTFC, or do you assume you know what it does only to get wrecked by it? I know I am guilty of 'losing' games as well as winning them. I get handed a lot of wins by players who don't read, my cards, or their own too.


Seriously I am not saying there is some great authority who should tell you 'if you follow this you are a pro!' Nor do I believe the list above is completely comprehensive. I do however think analzying yourself and other's by the gifts they have, you might see those around you in a different light. I play against some great players at the local events, they can't help that their good. I don't expect them to handicap themselves because I want to win.

It's just not as easy as saying "I want to win! I'm a pro!" If it were the worst 90% of the players would be pros. I want to play a wacky deck, so I'm casual doesn't make much since either. Certain players could play a 'wacky deck' and still dominate the majority of events they show up to, because their play skill is so high.

At what level of play? On the Pro Curcuit or 10k sure. At anything else I'll play whatever I think gives me the best chance to win, and still have a fun day of playing.

I don't care if my deck contains Batman or Strawberry Shortcake. I play for the system, not the characters.

When I hear a team I like is coming out, I get excited. I don't seem to have much affinity to characters, as I've never been able to even logically play my favorite character, Donna Troy, in a normal deck. I'm okay with that, but every set I hope she gets a dynamite version.

I'm more about the teams, but I am happy that we're focusing more on prominent characters being the big guns.

I've also become a fan of several teams purely from liking the way their team works, such as Underworld, Heralds of Galactus, Inhumans, and Defenders... which are all teams I was unaware of before.

I've been known to use Barbie here and there.

If I really dislike a team outside of the game (such as both Hellboy teams or Hellfire Club) then I don't play them in the game...

In any tournament where I have to pay even a single cent worth of entrance fee, whatever I think will win, I will play. In any event where entrance is free, I'll play whatever is the coolest deck I have that can still have some chance of winning.

One. Cost. Army.

When I pay, I play what I think is going to be fun for me. Whats the fun of winning if it isn't on my terms?

I really like BPRD and Hellfire....different strokes, eh?

Play what wins when it's a sanctioned tournament. Are you saying some people say "I want to play [insert deck here], but Wolverine is my favorite character, and even though he's not a great fit, in he goes"? I can't imagine ever doing that for a tournament.

Pro's treat it like a job, casuals treat it like a game. It gets hazy because some people really love their jobs and some people really take games seriously. I'm the latter.

This just might be my new sig.

That is EXACTLY how I feel.

I am a control freak of sorts. I hate sealed because there is a huge card pool and I'm being limited in my ability to utilize anything I wish to.

I love constructed because I have access to all cards printed, as long as I'm willing to shell out the duckets.

I'd rather lose with Black Panther on the table than win with Deathstroke ( I HATE that guy!!!)

My Gauntlet deck is currently looking for a replacement for Silver Surfer, and I think I've found one. I hated playing Surfer, but tried to play as if the characters don't matter to me, and it just feels like not being true to myself if I do any of this stuff in someone else's way other than what I enjoy.

Maybe there isn't a difference between casual and pro.

Maybe we are all just VS enthusiasts that have assorted play styles or some similar play styles as well.

Should we even bother to try to understand where the perceived segregation comes from? Or should we pretend that it's not even there and just play cards regardless?

Maybe the segregation is a way for us to rationalize our losses away, instead of just accepting that the opponent had a deck that was better in the situation?

I maintain that the fun of winning is winning. It makes me feel good, regardless of how it's done (legal means only, obv.)

Victory is its own reward.