Would you like to see True-Name Nemesis gone? [Archive] - Page 3

Zombie

12-15-2013, 01:58 PM

First, my bad on missing Pyroclasm and Rough//Tumble: I was mistaken when I thought that 2 global damage is actually relevant with all the heavy hitting "fatties" in Legacy (specifically Tarmogoyf).

Second, how did people deal with Stalker-Blade decks then? Because the format looks like it hasn't changed that much with either card's printing, so some archetype must have been keeping the Stalker down.

Third, Emrakul is far more oppressive than either Stalker or TNN whether with or without SFM. Even with Griselbrand existing, I doubt decks like Mono-U Omniscience, UR Sneak Attack, or 12 Post would have nearly as much momentum as other archetypes if it weren't for a 15/15 flier that forces the opponent to sac 6 permanents every time it swings and cannot be killed with traditional spot removal.

EDIT: missed the original message to me, one sec.

EDIT2: Now that I read that. . . . First, it's either gonna swing, or it's gonna block unless a Batterskull is equipped to it, correct? So therefore, the Batterskull (or rather the Stoneforge Mystic which tutors the Batterskull in the first place) is the primary target and TNN the secondary target. Second, I consider both the ability to slay Planeswalkers AND encourage evasive beats fairly healthy for the format: at the very least JMS won't be slammed into every blue deck simply because it's good.

Upon further reflection though, it does promote its own use, as TNN is evasive as well. Hmm . . . still think Emrakul is a lot worse, but I see the unhealthy argument a bit better now.

Stalker-Blade was in Standard. Just saying that TNN leads to a pretty similar scenario, except worse because TNN is actually an infinitely tall wall and a reasonable clock/planeswalker assassination device on it's own unlike Invisible Stalker, which couldn't really block and died to every kind of global effect easily. People hated that deck's guts. I think it's a worthwhile data point in an argument against TNN.

I agree the stupid fatties like Emralolol are bad. It just doesn't prevent me from saying that TNN is a bad thing to have in the format too.

Also, as to Batterskull being a primary threat, it's way easier to deal with/mitigate when it's on a creature you can actually kill and block. You suddenly have options, like blocking it with an Elvish Visionary and bouncing the Visionary before combat damage is dealt. Or you can just kill all the carriers. Can't really do either with TNN.

EpicLevelCommoner

12-15-2013, 02:05 PM

Stalker-Blade was in Standard. Just saying that TNN leads to a pretty similar scenario, except worse because TNN is actually an infinitely tall wall and a reasonable clock/planeswalker assassination device on it's own unlike Invisible Stalker, which couldn't really block and died to every kind of global effect easily. People hated that deck's guts. I think it's a worthwhile data point in an argument against TNN.

I agree the stupid fatties like Emralolol are bad. It just doesn't prevent me from saying that TNN is a bad thing to have in the format too.

Also, as to Batterskull being a primary threat, it's way easier to deal with/mitigate when it's on a creature you can actually kill and block. You suddenly have options, like blocking it with an Elvish Visionary and bouncing the Visionary before combat damage is dealt. Or you can just kill all the carriers. Can't really do either with TNN.

Fair enough: I don't play standard so I was unfamiliar with Stalker-Blade.

As an aside, I think it's actually a really nifty design for what it was designed for: Commander. Laying down an evasive clock against player that tells the other opponents, "Fear not, I'm singling this guy out right now" is swell imho.

UnderwaterGuy

12-15-2013, 02:36 PM

What is the issue with quoting one of Wizards own articles on this site?

Because tom lapille is ignorant-as-fuck about mtg in general. His stupidity has created a lot of jokes over the years.

Fair enough: I don't play standard so I was unfamiliar with Stalker-Blade.

As an aside, I think it's actually a really nifty design for what it was designed for: Commander. Laying down an evasive clock against player that tells the other opponents, "Fear not, I'm singling this guy out right now" is swell imho.

Yeah, I do agree with that. I've played with TNN in 60 card multiplayer and it's a lot more interesting there. Whoever designed it probably didn't even consider what it would do in a duel.

Lt. Quattro

12-15-2013, 03:38 PM

Because tom lapille is ignorant-as-fuck about mtg in general. His stupidity has created a lot of jokes over the years.

Yeah, I do agree with that. I've played with TNN in 60 card multiplayer and it's a lot more interesting there. Whoever designed it probably didn't even consider what it would do in a duel.

Wasn't its casting cost made so it was playable in legacy? I thought I read that in an article.

Dice_Box

12-15-2013, 05:41 PM

I think its design was made with legacy in mind. This card would be hard pressed to find itself in EDH and causing an issue. 3 damage in EDH where it's only ability is it can hit one player? That's not all that great. The fact that it has protection from a Player and not a Player controlling a chosen Commander I think is the proof you need to see it was made for us and not the format it is claimed it was made for. Add on aggressive costing, and you have the whole package.

On a sidenote, if the current trend keeps up and Deathblade does take over the format, who do you think would bite the Banhammer, this guy or Stoneforge? Just an open question, if one of the two has to go, who do you think RnD will pick?

HSCK

12-15-2013, 05:56 PM

What pace? 1 or 2 top 8s in most tournaments?

mini1337s

12-15-2013, 06:07 PM

On a sidenote, if the current trend keeps up and Deathblade does take over the format, who do you think would bite the Banhammer, this guy or Stoneforge? Just an open question, if one of the two has to go, who do you think RnD will pick?

December 2013 Results for Legacy T8s so far:
http://i.imgur.com/7iyKn02.png

LOOKS LIKE GOBLINS AND MUD NEED BANS TOO.

November 2013 Results:
http://i.imgur.com/eS3i723.png

I have no idea where you are getting your trending info for Deathblade taking over the format.

Call me in 4 months and we can review TNN's place in the format.

dontbiteitholmes

12-15-2013, 06:15 PM

Uh what? It single handedly catapulted decks that were not doing very well to the top of the meta, pretty much every deck is packing 3-5 answers for just TNN and I've even heard of Jund players main decking things like Golgari Charm so their TNN match ups are better. If it wasn't that good why would everyone be packing so much hate for it?

People do all kinds of idiotic things, MD Golgari Charm is probably overkill especially since it kills your Confidants as well. So yeah, bad players do bad things.

UW or UWx Stoneblade decks have been tier 1 off an on since Stoneforge and Jace have been cards. Even without TNN the deck would have been tier 1 again at some point.

You can't call all combo decks anti-TNN decks and use that as an excuse for TNN not showing up to the party. Combo was already a growing part of the metagame in the months before TNN came out as tends to happen whenever people start to think it's smart to run 3x Forces MD.

People aren't packing that much hate for it really. I mean I see SB slots but that's the point of SBs plus those cards are also good vs. other decks.

Dice_Box

12-15-2013, 06:33 PM

I have no idea where you are getting your trending info for Deathblade taking over the format.
Sorry let me have a second go at this.

If decks running both Stoneforge and TNN keep putting up strong numbers, as they are right now, what one of the two do you see more likely getting the boot. Please note I am not saying ban either outright right now*, I am simply asking a question that is kicking around in my head right now. That if something comes to ahead, what will give first, TNN or the card that feeds him with Equipment that up until now had not been an issue?

(*Though I have voiced my views on TTN and have zero issues with Forge.)

dontbiteitholmes

12-15-2013, 07:49 PM

Sorry let me have a second go at this.

If decks running both Stoneforge and TNN keep putting up strong numbers, as they are right now, what one of the two do you see more likely getting the boot. Please note I am not saying ban either outright right now*, I am simply asking a question that is kicking around in my head right now. That if something comes to ahead, what will give first, TNN or the card that feeds him with Equipment that up until now had not been an issue?

(*Though I have voiced my views on TTN and have zero issues with Forge.)

If your problem with TNN is equipment I have good news for you, they print cards that can destroy equipment.

Dice_Box

12-15-2013, 08:22 PM

Thats not my issue at all. I have been moving house since TNN was printed and have got to play a total of 3 times. On each of those times I have been playing with either a combo deck or my Fish deck. So I have had speed or counters. This question is not about situations I have faced but situations I am seeing on streams. After all I have been facing creatures with Equipment for years, I have cards to stop that.

The question is just one I have been thinking on. If (and thats the key word here "if") a ban comes down, what card do you see more likely to be banned, Stone or Name? Because honestly I haven't a clue. Stone has not been an issue in the format the whole time she has been in it. Yes she is a pain but she is just another tutor. TNN was obviously printed for a reason, Wizards is trying to do something here. You do not print a card like this, aimed at only one format and not have a reason. So what do people think is going to end up being the weak link; The card that has not been an issue up until there was a card printed that could push it overboard or the card that is pushing it?

Thats as blunt a question as I can ask. I am not trying to hide meanings in this, I am not trying to move discussion one way or the other. I just have this thought that if TNN was indeed printed for some hidden reason, what will matter more, the format as it was until this point or that reason that we do not yet know?

Edit, Fuck my spelling is up shit Creek of late.

Lord Seth

12-15-2013, 09:34 PM

Stalker-Blade was in Standard. Just saying that TNN leads to a pretty similar scenario, except worse because TNN is actually an infinitely tall wall and a reasonable clock/planeswalker assassination device on it's own unlike Invisible Stalker, which couldn't really block and died to every kind of global effect easily. People hated that deck's guts. I think it's a worthwhile data point in an argument against TNN.
I don't remember people hating Stalker-Blade in Standard because I don't remember it even being much of a thing in Standard. Unless you're referring to the UW Delver decks that played Invisible Stalker, but most UW Delver decks did not use Invisible Stalker. Personally, I found Invisible Stalker to be very underwhelming in UW Delver because you had to have an equipment to attach to it or else it was quite weak, whereas the other creatures were good value on their own.

Megadeus

12-15-2013, 09:53 PM

This thread is getting truly pathetic, now that some data is being generated TNN isn't oppressive or warping the format. Some folks just want to complain about the data...

I only mention this because the nonsense bitching has been going on for over a month. I get the feeling a lot of guys don't get the chance to play Legacy and haven't actually played with or against TNN.

Its a 'real card', but seriously its not even that good.

I played against it twice so far. Me on Maverick, him on Merfolk (same player twice in the swiss and T8). Card single handedly won him the game. It was... Exciting. /sarcasm

I dont think it is overpowered, I just think it is a dumb and boring card, that hurts more than it helps.

Zombie

12-15-2013, 10:22 PM

I played against it twice so far. Me on Maverick, him on Merfolk (same player twice in the swiss and T8). Card single handedly won him the game. It was... Exciting. /sarcasm

I dont think it is overpowered, I just think it is a dumb and boring card, that hurts more than it helps.

It helps?
*headscratch*
*tries to think of positive effects of TNN*
*headscratch*

HSCK

12-16-2013, 12:59 AM

Promotes an interactive archetype while pushing out what exactly?

Only 6 MD TNN and another 7 SB in the top 16, while 3 RUG Delver and 2 Punishing Jund decks that people in this thread have said are dead because of TNN, are in the top 8.

Tormod

12-16-2013, 01:36 AM

lordofthepit

12-16-2013, 01:39 AM

Only 6 MD TNN and another 7 SB in the top 16, while 3 RUG Delver and 2 Punishing Jund decks that people in this thread have said are dead because of TNN, are in the top 8.

No one said RUG Delver was dead, but all of the top RUG decklists have adapted by running TNN in their 75s.

Tormod

12-16-2013, 03:34 AM

20 Tarmogoyf in the top 8

#bangoyf *sarcasm*

Nielsie

12-16-2013, 04:10 AM

If decks running both Stoneforge and TNN keep putting up strong numbers, as they are right now, what one of the two do you see more likely getting the boot. Please note I am not saying ban either outright right now*, I am simply asking a question that is kicking around in my head right now. That if something comes to ahead, what will give first, TNN or the card that feeds him with Equipment that up until now had not been an issue?)
I already touched earlier in the topic on this. I think you have three options: TNN, Jitte or Stoneforge
- Stoneforge: you would destroy a whole batch of other decks in the splash damage while TNN decks would just run Jitte as a 4 of. Horrible solution...
- Jitte: could be a solution. Many people already don't like this card in Legacy. TNN decks can be raced or swarmed by other aggro or midrange strategies without seeing their creatures get killed by Jitte counters.
- TNN: we would return to the metagame before TNN. Not a bad thing because there was a lot more variation and openess in the format. The most important TNN decks (blade control and UWR) already are viable decks without TNN so they aren't hurt that much either. The only problematic thing if it happens right now: it would set a precedent for banning a new card too quickly.

The only really problematic equipment with TNN is Jitte. That is what times again takes over the board. Batterskull just takes too long to equip on a TNN.

As far as the meta is concerned. I am getting pretty bored with Starcitygames coverage. Luckily I never watch it live but just the recordings so I can skip all those TNN mirrors. My biggest problem at the moment: since TNN is legal it only failed to make an appearance into the finals the first legal weekend in LA. After this it made every Final and won all but one. Very exciting times huh? I always found Starcitygames coverage great because you would see so many different decks and every tournament was open for anyone to win, these days it seems that some TNN deck will just run away with it...

dontbiteitholmes

12-16-2013, 04:18 AM

^^^
Exactly, this is the data that i'm talking about.

This really causes me to question those who are calling for a ban of TNN, just exactly how many games have they actually played with and/or against True-Name.

Re: the SCG Las Vegas Legacy top 8: (http://sales.starcitygames.com/deckdatabase/deckshow.php?t%5BT2%5D=3&event_ID=20&feedin=&start_date=2013-12-15&end_date=2013-12-15&city=Las+Vegas&state=NV&country=US&start=1&finish=16&exp=&p_first=&p_last=&simple_card_name%5B1%5D=&simple_card_name%5B2%5D=&simple_card_name%5B3%5D=&simple_card_name%5B4%5D=&simple_card_name%5B5%5D=&w_perc=0&g_perc=0&r_perc=0&b_perc=0&u_perc=0&a_perc=0&comparison%5B1%5D=%3E%3D&card_qty%5B1%5D=1&card_name%5B1%5D=&comparison%5B2%5D=%3E%3D&card_qty%5B2%5D=1&card_name%5)
It doesn't take a rocket scientist to tell you Jund has all the answer to a TNN, and already crushes Esper Stoneblade should be better positioned. Two in the top 8. Folks are claiming that TNN kills rug, yet we see three in the top 8. The top 16 we see the "pre-TNN" usual suspects of Elves, Death and Taxes, Countertop, Sneak Show, an Esper Stoneblade and some variety with imperial painter and lands.

Let's not underestimate for our beautiful format's ability to find answers, and really lets be real here, yes TNN is a card, but really its not that amazing.

Stay calm and play Legacy.

Yeah it's amazing how once every deck either ignores TNN or runs at least 2x SB cards which deal with it all of a sudden it looks like it might not ruin Legacy. It's almost like the format is adapting or something. Damn never could have seen that coming, good thing everyone didn't freak out and ask for a banning or something before the format had time to adjust because in hindsight that might look foolish. Oh wait, that totally did happen, well at least once things settle down and people see TNN isn't the end of the world they will learn a lesson and next time something like this happens they will not freak out, holy crap did anyone else just have deja-vu? It's almost like this has happened many times before.

No one said RUG Delver was dead, but all of the top RUG decklists have adapted by running TNN in their 75s.

Yeah it took the Sulfuric Vortex slot for good reason. It can absorb Batterskull, swing through blockers, is hard to kill, and is easier to cast. Definitely an upgrade there but at the same time RUG Delver now also has to battle against opposing TNNs which it can potentially have a hard time with, so it all evens out.

Feaor

12-16-2013, 06:13 AM

lordofthepit

12-16-2013, 06:21 AM

Apparently TNN makes Sylvan Basilisk a card in Jund, who would've guessed 5 mana 2/4s were legacy playable.

They're not.

HSCK

12-16-2013, 07:46 AM

Apparently TNN makes Sylvan Basilisk a card in Jund, who would've guessed 5 mana 2/4s were legacy playable. Its pretty easy to say herp derp the whole top 8 isn't Trueblade but if you look at the sideboards for some of the decks like Jund in particular, there are 11-13 cards they are bringing in for that matchup. The reason they're doing ok is that the Trueblade decks are popular and so they can devote their whole sideboard, for the most part, to beating it and hope to just play nothing but those decks and other decks like RUG that they are naturally good against.

This is literally the most nonsensical thing I've ever read on this forum. Having an extra Ancient Grudge and a couple Golgari Charms is definitely super warping, not like there are other decks that you might want them for, maybe some sort of combo deck that is pretty fast involving x/1s? And Basilisk, what!?

Tylert

12-16-2013, 08:04 AM

D&T would hate seeing Jund with extra Golgari charms and ancient grudges... It's already a not so good matchup.

Basilisk ... hum... don't see why it's good against Jund.

Feaor

12-16-2013, 08:08 AM

This is literally the most nonsensical thing I've ever read on this forum. Having an extra Ancient Grudge and a couple Golgari Charms is definitely super warping, not like there are other decks that you might want them for, maybe some sort of combo deck that is pretty fast involving x/1s? And Basilisk, what!?

I will give you that most of the sideboard cards aren't that narrow that they're useless in other match ups but they are definitely boarding a lot of cards for that matchup, REB, Charm, Edict, EE, Grudge, etc. Like I said they have about 11 cards to bring in for that matchup, I think any matchup is pretty winnable if you sideboard that many cards for it. As for Basilisk go look at the 5th place Jund list as its pretty clear that you haven't if you're asking this.

dontbiteitholmes

12-16-2013, 08:25 AM

Apparently TNN makes Sylvan Basilisk a card in Jund, who would've guessed 5 mana 2/4s were legacy playable. Its pretty easy to say herp derp the whole top 8 isn't Trueblade but if you look at the sideboards for some of the decks like Jund in particular, there are 11-13 cards they are bringing in for that matchup. The reason they're doing ok is that the Trueblade decks are popular and so they can devote their whole sideboard, for the most part, to beating it and hope to just play nothing but those decks and other decks like RUG that they are naturally good against.

Hate to burst your bubble kid but that is obviously supposed to be Sylvan Library. Someone got owned by autocomplete and didn't notice.

Also give me a break. Is there any possible top 8 where someone wouldn't find an excuse to complain about TNN.

The top 8 could be 8 different combo decks and people would be like "TNN made creature decks unviable, ban TNN!"

HSCK

12-16-2013, 08:38 AM

I will give you that most of the sideboard cards aren't that narrow that they're useless in other match ups but they are definitely boarding a lot of cards for that matchup, REB, Charm, Edict, EE, Grudge, etc. Like I said they have about 11 cards to bring in for that matchup, I think any matchup is pretty winnable if you sideboard that many cards for it. As for Basilisk go look at the 5th place Jund list as its pretty clear that you haven't if you're asking this.

What are you talking about? It's in neither list and no one is casting 5 mana 2/4s in the hope the opponent will block it, if you think that then I suggest you actually play Legacy.

Feaor

12-16-2013, 08:43 AM

What are you talking about? It's in neither list and no one is casting 5 mana 2/4s in the hope the opponent will block it, if you think that then I suggest you actually play Legacy.

http://sales.starcitygames.com//deckdatabase/displaydeck.php?DeckID=61492

Now someone suggested it was a typo which could very well be the case, but weirdly its a card which can't be profitably blocked by TNN.

lyracian

12-16-2013, 08:51 AM

. As for Basilisk go look at the 5th place Jund list as its pretty clear that you haven't if you're asking this.

Hate to burst your bubble kid but that is obviously supposed to be Sylvan Library. Someone got owned by autocomplete and didn't notice."
I did not see any of Mr. Hunsaker's games on camera so I have no idea if he was playing Basilisk or Library; I would expect Library but even if it was Basilisk there is no saying that i did any good as a lone one-of. River Boa would seem a better choice if you want an evasive creature to answer True-Blade. A 2/4 with no equipment is never going to race a 3/1. Nice spot in seeing it in the list though!

bjholmes3

12-16-2013, 08:58 AM

dontbiteitholmes

12-16-2013, 09:11 AM

http://sales.starcitygames.com//deckdatabase/displaydeck.php?DeckID=61492

Now someone suggested it was a typo which could very well be the case, but weirdly its a card which can't be profitably blocked by TNN.

http://static4.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20110726074751/disney/images/5/50/Winniethepooh2011dvdrip.jpg

Please tell me you are a troll.

HSCK

12-16-2013, 09:22 AM

http://sales.starcitygames.com//deckdatabase/displaydeck.php?DeckID=61492

Now someone suggested it was a typo which could very well be the case, but weirdly its a card which can't be profitably blocked by TNN.

It says Scavenging Ooze. So what if TNN can't block it profitably? WHY ARE THEY BLOCKING IT EVER!? Why would anyone play that card, it's totally ridiculous.

Arsenal

12-16-2013, 09:31 AM

Good to see other people have started pouring actual data into this nonsensical thread. Why would someone who allows cards like Force of Will, which completely negates certain archetypes (glass cannon combo, mostly), complain about TNN for doing some of the same things? It's uninteractive? Unfun? Talk to a Belcher player about how they feel about Force. Oh wait, they got over it. FoW is ancient, and people have adapted.

For the umpteenth time, combo is supposed to be uninteractive by it's very design. Nobody is complaining about combo being uninteractive because it's supposed to be uninteractive; that's like complaining that fire is hot. Creatures, however, are completely different. Creatures, by design, are supposed to be interacted with. In fact, Magic has an entire phase dedicated to creatures (combat) so that players may interact with opposing creatures with their own creatures and spells and/or abilities.

danyul has a pretty nice post a few pages ago re: the mentality of combo vs. fair and how TNN changes the dynamic of Magic.

RE: data, SCG Legacy Open Las Vegas has 4/8 decks running TNN in their 75, with a TNN deck winning the whole thing (I seem to recall another TNN deck winning last week's SCG Open too). 2/8 decks are combo and don't care about TNN decks at all. The remaining 2 decks are midrange decks that lose terribly to combo, but just so happen to be in colors that wreck TNN decks. Seems good.

Feaor

12-16-2013, 09:41 AM

It says Scavenging Ooze. So what if TNN can't block it profitably? WHY ARE THEY BLOCKING IT EVER!? Why would anyone play that card, it's totally ridiculous.

Uh what? Can you actually read? Look in the Maindeck. I'll concede that its probably Sylvan Library but they haven't changed it, of all the typos they could have its weird because its obviously really bad but because of TNN there is a very slight chance it might be real.

Finn

12-16-2013, 09:46 AM

I am not weighing in here. I am on the fence, and I am thankful that this thread exists, and that you folks are arguing so passionately on both sides. I have been lurking to see what the rest of you have to say. So I am really only here to make trouble.

Good to see other people have started pouring actual data into this nonsensical thread. Why would someone who allows cards like Force of Will, which completely negates certain archetypes (glass cannon combo, mostly), complain about TNN for doing some of the same things? It's uninteractive? Unfun? Talk to a Belcher player about how they feel about Force. Oh wait, they got over it. FoW is ancient, and people have adapted.
This is a terrible argument. Glass cannon pilots did not adapt to anything. In fact, they just lose to the point that we actually have a category of deck called "glass cannon" with a narrative that your strategy is to hope you don't face FoW. This is precisely what people do not want TNN to do to aggro. You have just made a solid argument for the opposing position.

TsumiBand

12-16-2013, 10:11 AM

If we operate on the assumption that Sylvan Basilisk is not a typo (which, I strongly doubt), there are a number of cards which are arguably much, much better with a similar effect.

http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Search/Default.aspx?page=0&type=+%5B%22becomes%20blocked%22%5D+%5Bdestroy%5D%7C%7Csubtype=+%5B%22becomes%20blocked%22%5D+%5Bdestroy%5D%7C%7Ctext=+%5B%22becomes%20blocked%22%5D+%5Bdestroy%5D&sort=cmc+

Tangle Asp is a 1/2 for 1G that might actually come down before TNN and encourage less blocking. Cockatrice is strictly better, although this strangely may be an actual corner case for why "strictly better isn't always strictly better" -- Flying makes it worse if the goal is to try and get TNN to chump it. Speaking entirely as a little kid, I've often wanted to play BG Madness, which makes Gorgon Recluse more attractive than the lot of these creatures.

Really, the more I try to humor the idea that the best thing the pilot could dream up to combat TNN is to trick the opponent into blocking with their 3/1, the more I believe that the presence of Sylvan Basilisk is simply a typo. At that point, you may as well just play creatures with Flanking in concert with Cavalry Master, the self-appointed king of keyword recursion. Stock up on those Jolrael's Centaurs!

Bed Decks Palyer

12-16-2013, 10:20 AM

I'd use that enchantment that changes creature types and change TNN into Wall... then BOOOOM! smash it with a Battering Ram.

EDIT:
It's called Unnatural Selection and it can't change creatures into Walls... :mad:
Wait! In fact I just band the Ram with Basilisk and start the race.
Or even better. I'd change TNN into Legend and let it die to legend rule.

HSCK

12-16-2013, 10:29 AM

Uh what? Can you actually read? Look in the Maindeck. I'll concede that its probably Sylvan Library but they haven't changed it, of all the typos they could have its weird because its obviously really bad but because of TNN there is a very slight chance it might be real.

There is no chance, evidence, it's a bad card and you should feel even worse for thinking it's an actual part of any list in Legacy.

This is how ridiculous the arguments have become, people arguing Sylvan Basilisk is in a Legacy deck because TNN is that format warping.

Feaor

12-16-2013, 10:40 AM

I went and watched some of the Vegas Legacy top 8 coverage and I'm actually more on the fence than I was before, the Jund player in the finals punted the second game by not main phasing his charm so it couldn't be countered and had to mull to 5 the third game, TNN wasn't actually completely unbeatable as soon as it came down. That being said I think its really bad in the long run for Blue to have the best card selection (Brainstorm, Ponder), the best disruption (Daze, FoW, Spell Pierce, etc.) and the best creatures for attacking and blocking (Delver, TNN), all blue needs is Lightning Bolt and there would be literally no reason not to play blue.

Julian23

12-16-2013, 10:44 AM

It's called Unnatural Selection and it can't target True-Name Nemesis

FTFY.
Sometimes I'm honestly not sure whether you are trolling. Also, "Legend" isn't a creature type anymore.

Arsenal

12-16-2013, 10:49 AM

This is how ridiculous the arguments have become, people arguing Sylvan Basilisk is in a Legacy deck because TNN is that format warping.

Pretty sure that all the TNN-supporters have been using "but there are answers to it!" argument this whole time. In fact, didn't I see Magnetic Mountain, Crackdown and Wing Shards being championed as possible TNN answers? The TNN-supporters can't have it both ways; terrible answers can be used to bolster the "TNN has answers!" stance, but can't be used to bolster the "WTF, look what ppl have to run to fight TNN" stance?

Also, that is 99.9% a typo. But I do find it funny that terrible answers can be only used to support the "TNN has answers!" crowd, but if they're used elsewhere, then it's "rediculous".

TsumiBand

12-16-2013, 10:59 AM

Metagame deck of the first quarter of 2014:

Mr. Toilet Will Have His Revenge on PT Seattle

GUYS

4 Sidewinder Sliver
4 Knight of the Holy Nimbus
4 Knight of Valor
3 Zhalfirin Crusader
3 Cavalry Master

TECH

2 Crackdown
2 Invasion Plans
2 Sunforger

SORCERIES

4 Enlightened Tutor
4 Path to Exile
4 Lightning Helix
4 Skullcrack

COMMANDER (MAINDECK)

1 Telim'Tor

LAND SPELLS
4 Sacred Foundry
1 Plateau
4 Arid Mesa
3 Clifftop Retreat

the right number of Plains and Mountains

danyul

12-16-2013, 11:10 AM

HSCK

12-16-2013, 11:13 AM

Pretty sure that all the TNN-supporters have been using "but there are answers to it!" argument this whole time. In fact, didn't I see Magnetic Mountain, Crackdown and Wing Shards being championed as possible TNN answers? The TNN-supporters can't have it both ways; terrible answers can be used to bolster the "TNN has answers!" stance, but can't be used to bolster the "WTF, look what ppl have to run to fight TNN" stance?

Also, that is 99.9% a typo. But I do find it funny that terrible answers can be only used to support the "TNN has answers!" crowd, but if they're used elsewhere, then it's "rediculous".

Pretty sure those are all sarcastic vs. the anti-crowd reaching for data and making these arguments.

You've also repeatedly made every pieces of data "TNN or anti-TNN" without respect to what they did in the meta before like Elves, D&T, and Combo. They don't get played solely on how they interact with TNN, just that the pilots know TNN is in the meta, just like any other good card. That's not bannable warping, that's just a new card that has Legacy chops. Unless you want to freeze the whole format it's going to continually happen.

Kayradis

12-16-2013, 11:13 AM

Ill just play Llawan SB in Elves.

Arsenal

12-16-2013, 11:17 AM

Pretty sure those are all sarcastic vs. the anti-crowd reaching for data and making these arguments.

You've also repeatedly made every pieces of data "TNN or anti-TNN" without respect to what they did in the meta before like Elves, D&T, and Combo. They don't get played solely on how they interact with TNN, just that the pilots know TNN is in the meta, just like any other good card. That's not bannable warping, that's just a new card that has Legacy chops. Unless you want to freeze the whole format it's going to continually happen.

What are you talking about? I've said countless times in this thread that there are some decks that simply don't care about TNN existing. In fact, I imagine combo is probably happiest of all that people are maindecking legit anti-TNN tech; just more cards that combo doesn't have to think about game 1.

EDIT: lol danyul, thanks for the information. If that is 100% legit, then it'll be funny to see how quickly the "it's rediculous!" crowd changes their tune to "see! i told you there were TNN answers and that the format will adapt!"

Bed Decks Palyer

12-16-2013, 11:27 AM

FTFY.
Sometimes I'm honestly not sure whether you are trolling. Also, "Legend" isn't a creature type anymore.

Thank you cpt. Obvious.

danyul

12-16-2013, 11:36 AM

What are you talking about? I've said countless times in this thread that there are some decks that simply don't care about TNN existing. In fact, I imagine combo is probably happiest of all that people are maindecking legit anti-TNN tech; just more cards that combo doesn't have to think about game 1.

EDIT: lol danyul, thanks for the information. If that is 100% legit, then it'll be funny to see how quickly the "it's rediculous!" crowd changes their tune to "see! i told you there were TNN answers and that the format will adapt!"

Only time can tell. I hope it's legit only because it is so hilariously bad. But in a cute way.

Bed Decks Palyer

12-16-2013, 11:43 AM

Metagame deck of the first quarter of 2014:

Mr. Toilet Will Have His Revenge on PT Seattle

I just built it.

Aderne taps Knight of the Holy Nimbus
Aderne taps Knight of the Holy Nimbus
It is now the Combat Phase, Declare Blockers Step
<Aderne> Ok
7even taps Mother of Runes
<Aderne> flanking resolves?
<7even> ähm
<7even> donno
<Aderne> It's not a question
<7even> ok screw u
<System> Player Lost

Arsenal

12-16-2013, 11:53 AM

Only time can tell. I hope it's legit only because it is so hilariously bad. But in a cute way.

If it's legit, the reasoning behind it is fairly sound. Not dying to Deathblade's Abrupt Decay and Patriot's Lightning Bolt, while forcing through damage through the TNN wall seems decent-ish. However, probably not for 5 mana and when you only get 2 points across, but eat at least 3 on the backswing. Can you get more information from the Jund player as to how relevant/good/bad it was throughout his tourney?

danyul

12-16-2013, 11:58 AM

If it's legit, the reasoning behind it is fairly sound. Not dying to Deathblade's Abrupt Decay and Patriot's Lightning Bolt, while forcing through damage through the TNN wall seems decent-ish. However, probably not for 5 mana and when you only get 2 points across, but eat at least 3 on the backswing. Can you get more information from the Jund player as to how relevant/good/bad it was throughout his tourney?

I'll see what I can dig up.

Arsenal

12-16-2013, 12:10 PM

There is no chance, evidence, it's a bad card and you should feel even worse for thinking it's an actual part of any list in Legacy.

This is how ridiculous the arguments have become, people arguing Sylvan Basilisk is in a Legacy deck because TNN is that format warping.

The guy who piloted that Jund deck is a local. According to his Facebook comments, the Basilisk is not a typo.

Probably the best posts in here.

Higgs

12-16-2013, 12:31 PM

Nice sig. Frankly as the debate went longer, some arguments to paint TNN as a normal card started pushing the boundaries of absurdity.

Feaor

12-16-2013, 12:35 PM

TsumiBand

12-16-2013, 01:39 PM

I just built it.

Aderne taps Knight of the Holy Nimbus
Aderne taps Knight of the Holy Nimbus
It is now the Combat Phase, Declare Blockers Step
<Aderne> Ok
7even taps Mother of Runes
<Aderne> flanking resolves?
<7even> ähm
<7even> donno
<Aderne> It's not a question
<7even> ok screw u
<System> Player Lost

OH MY GOD.

I was just gunning for "budget bin anti-TNN overkill". That's really funny though.

Unironically, Mother of Runes should probably be somewhere in that pile of mine, but I forgot about it because flanking apparently inspires a lot more confusion than originally intended.

lordofthepit

12-16-2013, 01:44 PM

Admiral_Arzar

12-16-2013, 01:48 PM

OH MY GOD.

I was just gunning for "budget bin anti-TNN overkill". That's really funny though.

Unironically, Mother of Runes should probably be somewhere in that pile of mine, but I forgot about it because flanking apparently inspires a lot more confusion than originally intended.

Omg I want to play this deck at my local so bad. All flanking dudes maindeck and like 15 hate bears for a sideboard.

TsumiBand

12-16-2013, 02:18 PM

Omg I want to play this deck at my local so bad. All flanking dudes maindeck and like 15 hate bears for a sideboard.

Feel free to lift the decklist (http://tappedout.net/mtg-decks/lolmrtoilet-will-have-his-revenge-on-pt-seattle/) as you see fit. It's time for Holy Tommy Gun to return and take its place in the Circle of Life.

True-Name Nemesis has been destroying what was previously a fun, interactive, enjoyable, challenging, refreshing, bold, dynamic, crisp, endearing, touching, high-powered format.

It connects without fail, blocks 101% of the creatures in the game, and cannot be targeted by any removal spell. It chortles in the face of Starstorm, Earthquake, Plague Spitter, and other similar effects. This "just-a-beater" 3/1 for 1UU has removed more interaction from the game of Magic than Mike Long.

This deck is an attempt to rectify that situation.

lyracian

12-16-2013, 02:31 PM

I feel somewhat vindicated for having brought it up, people dismissed me, and then now it might actually be true. I do agree it is a little cute but I don't think its the absolute worst, Jund plays quite a few lands and has DRS as a dork so its actually castable. But I don't think I'd play it to fight TNN, I'd rather main deck something like Golgari Charm or Toxic Deluge as both of those cards are a little more reasonable against the field.
It certainly has a unique take on Deathtouch. However if you want a creature that is immune to Bolt/AD and can attack past TNN I would have thought Tombstalker would fit the bill and generally be cheaper to cast. A 5/5 flyer can actualy block Delver and race TNN.

Bed Decks Palyer

12-16-2013, 02:50 PM

OH MY GOD.

I was just gunning for "budget bin anti-TNN overkill". That's really funny though.

Unironically, Mother of Runes should probably be somewhere in that pile of mine, but I forgot about it because flanking apparently inspires a lot more confusion than originally intended.
Omg I want to play this deck at my local so bad. All flanking dudes maindeck and like 15 hate bears for a sideboard.
Several cards were quite underwhelming, though, esp. the enchantments. Switch them for Bolts.

TsumiBand

12-16-2013, 02:55 PM

Several cards were quite underwhelming, though, esp. the enchantments. Switch them for Bolts.

In fairness, I was trolling in lieu of comments people were making about Sylvan Basilisk and previous comments about weird suggestions like Flanking and Crackdown.

I am sad to hear that Invasion Plans + Flanking Flanking isn't a meta foil, though.

danyul

12-16-2013, 02:56 PM

The guy who piloted that Jund deck is a local. According to his Facebook comments, the Basilisk is not a typo. His team chose that creature because it can't die to Bolt or Abrupt Decay and it can profitably attack into a TNN.

That still doesn't make it awesome and he didn't mention if it actually did anything in his Top 8 run.

But it wasn't a typo as far as I know. I will update you guys if it turns out I'm getting next-level trolled via sarcastic Facebook comments.

*BREAKING NEWS*

A Next-Level Trolling Incident occurred this morning on the corner of The Internets and Sarcastic Facebook Comment. A group of unsuspecting bystanders watched, horrified, as a Sylvan Library transformed into a Sylvan Basilisk. And after some confusion among all present, transformed back into a Sylvan Library! Authorities are standing by as the group of citizens reassesses their belief systems. The National Guard has been notified and the CIA's top psychologists are on the scene. More to come at 11.

Translation: It was a Sylvan Library. I hate everybody on Facebook. But this was pretty funny. GG.

lordofthepit

12-16-2013, 02:59 PM

*BREAKING NEWS*

A Next-Level Trolling Incident occurred this morning on the corner of The Internets and Sarcastic Facebook Comment. A group of unsuspecting bystanders watched, horrified, as a Sylvan Library transformed into a Sylvan Basilisk. And after some confusion among all present, transformed back into a Sylvan Library! Authorities are standing by as the group of citizens reassesses their belief systems. The National Guard has been notified and the CIA's top psychologists are on the scene. More to come at 11.

Translation: It was a Sylvan Library. I hate everybody on Facebook. But this was pretty funny. GG.

Flipping more times than a Huntmaster of the Fells.

Feaor

12-16-2013, 03:02 PM

*BREAKING NEWS*

A Next-Level Trolling Incident occurred this morning on the corner of The Internets and Sarcastic Facebook Comment. A group of unsuspecting bystanders watched, horrified, as a Sylvan Library transformed into a Sylvan Basilisk. And after some confusion among all present, transformed back into a Sylvan Library! Authorities are standing by as the group of citizens reassesses their belief systems. The National Guard has been notified and the CIA's top psychologists are on the scene. More to come at 11.

Translation: It was a Sylvan Library. I hate everybody on Facebook. But this was pretty funny. GG.

Pretty much expected as much, its kinda amusing that that the top hit for Sylvan just so happens to have extremely niche usage against TNN that it wasn't completely implausible, just extremely unlikely.

danyul

12-16-2013, 03:05 PM

Flipping more times than a Huntmaster of the Fells.

Daggers dude.

mini1337s

12-16-2013, 03:29 PM

*BREAKING NEWS*

A Next-Level Trolling Incident occurred this morning on the corner of The Internets and Sarcastic Facebook Comment. A group of unsuspecting bystanders watched, horrified, as a Sylvan Library transformed into a Sylvan Basilisk. And after some confusion among all present, transformed back into a Sylvan Library! Authorities are standing by as the group of citizens reassesses their belief systems. The National Guard has been notified and the CIA's top psychologists are on the scene. More to come at 11.

Translation: It was a Sylvan Library. I hate everybody on Facebook. But this was pretty funny. GG.
Can you believe someone actually did that? Went on the Internet and told lies? ;)

ESG

12-16-2013, 03:38 PM

It certainly has a unique take on Deathtouch. However if you want a creature that is immune to Bolt/AD and can attack past TNN I would have thought Tombstalker would fit the bill and generally be cheaper to cast. A 5/5 flyer can actualy block Delver and race TNN.

This sounds great until you flip it off Dark Confidant and die.

Barook

12-16-2013, 03:43 PM

Omg I want to play this deck at my local so bad. All flanking dudes maindeck and like 15 hate bears for a sideboard.
To be fair, Sidewinder Sliver would probably work better in Slivers - but then, you could just run more flyer Slivers and completely ignore TNN.

Why not run Slivers instead? Crystalline Sliver laughs at any spot removal (or Jitte counters trying to -1/-1, for the matter), flyers grant a decent clock, stop Delver and ignore TNN as a blocker while Harmonic Sliver shits all over SFM and equipment shenanigans.

Feaor

12-16-2013, 03:44 PM

This sounds great until you flip it off Dark Confidant and die.

I mean Team America/BUG Delver plays both, although its a lot better set up to deal with this and cast Stalker easier since it has cantrips like Brainstorm and Ponder. Stalker is certainly a way to go over the top of TNN but I don't think its that great in Jund since you don't have cantrips to fuel an early stalker like Delver.

danyul

12-16-2013, 03:45 PM

Can you believe someone actually did that? Went on the Internet and told lies? ;)

The Internet is a horrible place! Full of lies and lying liars who tell them!

Tormod

12-16-2013, 03:50 PM

OK I figured it out. Since there is no logical reason to ban TNN, some of you guys asking for it must be racist against merfolk. You know them merfolk, coming here and wrecking the format and all. They're prolly responsible for the new legend rule too. Damn blue skinned sea monkeys.

amiright?

lordofthepit

12-16-2013, 04:03 PM

I mean Team America/BUG Delver plays both, although its a lot better set up to deal with this and cast Stalker easier since it has cantrips like Brainstorm and Ponder. Stalker is certainly a way to go over the top of TNN but I don't think its that great in Jund since you don't have cantrips to fuel an early stalker like Delver.

I don't think I've seen a Team America deck play Dark Confidant in years. I do think Eva Green plays this consistently (except it's not a deck anymore), and I've seen phazonmutant run both in Grixis and always get away with it.

Arsenal

12-16-2013, 04:03 PM

mini1337s

12-16-2013, 04:12 PM

As of 2:48pm Central on 12-16-13, these are the top 10 decks in Legacy (http://www.tcdecks.net/tierdecks.php?anio=2013&mes=8&format=Legacy)

1.) RUG Delver
2.) Shardless BUG
3.) Deathblade
4.) Sneak and Show
5.) Jund
6.) ANT
7.) Death & Taxes
8.) Elves
9.) Patriot
10.) OmniTell

There are 4 combo decks (Sneak and Show, ANT, Elves and OmniTell) that do not care about TNN at all. These decks will do it's thing no matter what, so for the discussion, it really narrows down to the remaining 6 non-combo decks.

RUG Delver, Deathblade, Patriot all run TNN in their 75. So that leaves 3 decks left that aren't combo and don't run TNN themselves. Of the 3, 2 of them (Jund and Shardless BUG) are in colors that have a multitude of the exact answers needed to combat TNN. So there's exactly 1 deck (Death and Taxes) in the top 10 that isn't combo, doesn't run TNN and isn't in a natural color that gives them many feasible answers.

I'm not quite sure what people are looking at, but the data suggests that you either play a deck that doesn't care about TNN at all (combo, Miracles too), play with TNN (Delver decks, Blade decks or some hybrid of the two) or play a deck that can easily and effective answer TNN (most times it'll be BGx decks).
Did you crawl out from under a rock on November 1st? All 10 of those decks were widely played BEFORE TNN was printed. All 10 of those show consistent Top 8 finishes throughout the last 6 months, it's not like they just showed up to combat TNN.
OMGz, people are playing mass untargeted creature removal? There have been decks playing mass removal since the beginning of fucking Magic. "BUUT BUT BUT MAINDECK GOLGARI CHARM!" people say; you realize it regenerates creatures too right? And destroys Sneak Attack. etc etc ad nauseaum.

I suggest that you feel your face as I think you have these on:
http://rarelittlebird.files.wordpress.com/2011/05/horse-blinders.jpg?w=470

Arsenal

12-16-2013, 04:15 PM

No shit, but now there's literally no reason NOT to run those decks exclusively from this point forward.

mini1337s

12-16-2013, 04:17 PM

No shit, but now there's literally no reason NOT to run those decks exclusively from this point forward.
Oh god, someone on the internet thinks the Legacy meta is permanently stuck in Fall of 2013!!! Where is the Doctor when you need him!

Dice_Box

12-16-2013, 04:24 PM

You cannot call on the Doctor, his name was the very Nemesis of the Silence. He will destroy this whole situation.

Also, on DnT. I do not think DnT will hold its numbers going forward but I am willing to bet a ton of people just finished building it. For that reason we will see it for a while yet until it starts to shift to either using fliers or vanishes totally.

Arsenal

12-16-2013, 04:27 PM

I anticipate D&T maintaining it's position if people start overloading on Sneak and Show to run through most of the fair TNN and non-TNN decks. If Sneak and Show wanes (unlikely), then D&T falling off wouldn't be a surprise.

Star|Scream

12-16-2013, 04:30 PM

No shit, but now there's literally no reason NOT to run those decks exclusively from this point forward.

Wow man. You're just grasping at straws here. I'm done.

dontbiteitholmes

12-16-2013, 04:36 PM

I'm getting next-level trolled via sarcastic Facebook comments.

Fixed that for you.

What are you talking about? I've said countless times in this thread that there are some decks that simply don't care about TNN existing. In fact, I imagine combo is probably happiest of all that people are maindecking legit anti-TNN tech; just more cards that combo doesn't have to think about game 1.

EDIT: lol danyul, thanks for the information. If that is 100% legit, then it'll be funny to see how quickly the "it's rediculous!" crowd changes their tune to "see! i told you there were TNN answers and that the format will adapt!"

I have yet to see anti-TNN maindeck cards in a top 8/16 deck. I mean bad players do bad things but I've played vs. someone before and gotten blown out because they maindecked Mindbreak Trap, that doesn't say anything about the power of combo though, just that some people are that stupid and once every 5 rounds it might pay off for them.

When you guys realize you are being trolled it would be funny to see you be like, "wow I can't believe my head is so far in the sand I ever for a second believed someone actually played that card in Legacy, maybe this is indicative of how skewed my general outlook on TNN is." But in reality we all know you guys are so far gone you will just continue to complain.

Pretty sure that all the TNN-supporters have been using "but there are answers to it!" argument this whole time. In fact, didn't I see Magnetic Mountain, Crackdown and Wing Shards being championed as possible TNN answers? The TNN-supporters can't have it both ways; terrible answers can be used to bolster the "TNN has answers!" stance, but can't be used to bolster the "WTF, look what ppl have to run to fight TNN" stance?

Also, that is 99.9% a typo. But I do find it funny that terrible answers can be only used to support the "TNN has answers!" crowd, but if they're used elsewhere, then it's "rediculous".

Okay so you quote like 3 terrible answers one person threw out in a thread and thus everyone saying TNN has legit answers is on that tier, strawman much? Also on the 0.00000000% chance anyone would ever really play Basilisk it still wouldn't be an answer to TNN in any way.

If it's legit, the reasoning behind it is fairly sound. Not dying to Deathblade's Abrupt Decay and Patriot's Lightning Bolt, while forcing through damage through the TNN wall seems decent-ish. However, probably not for 5 mana and when you only get 2 points across, but eat at least 3 on the backswing. Can you get more information from the Jund player as to how relevant/good/bad it was throughout his tourney?

God I am dying so hard right now. I get the feeling I will be quoting this thread someday in the future if it looks like someone might be about to take you seriously like you know what you are talking about. Again if you believe in Basilisk even a sliver you should probably stop theory crafting and go sharpen your scrutiny.

Arsenal

12-16-2013, 04:36 PM

Wow man. You're just grasping at straws here. I'm done.

If you're looking to build a creature-based deck, the only two questions that matter are "how can I best support running TNN?" and "can I beat TNN without running TNN of my own?" Obviously, this doesn't apply to combo decks as they don't care about TNN at all.

EDIT: dontbiteitholmes, if someone said there was a creature not named TNN that didn't die to Abrupt Decay, Lightning Bolt and could swing through opposing TNNs, I'm sure that would pique your interest. Once you found out it cost 5 mana and only had 2 power, then your interest would turn into "unplayable". That's pretty much what I stated in my comment, don't know what's unclear about it.

Dice_Box

12-16-2013, 04:38 PM

That's not totally true, I will change zero cards in my Goblin deck to deal with this guy.

Arsenal

12-16-2013, 04:41 PM

That's not totally true, I will change zero cards in my Goblin deck to deal with this guy.

Goblins was put on life support when Batterskull was printed, died when Deathrite Shaman was printed and was buried when TNN was printed. Goblins isn't a factor in the meta anymore.

dontbiteitholmes

12-16-2013, 04:43 PM

If you're looking to build a creature-based deck, the only two questions that matter are "how can I best support running TNN?" and "can I beat TNN without running TNN of my own?" Obviously, this doesn't apply to combo decks as they don't care about TNN at all.

EDIT: dontbiteitholmes, if someone said there was a creature not named TNN that didn't die to Abrupt Decay, Lightning Bolt and could swing through opposing TNNs, I'm sure that would pique your interest. Once you found out it cost 5 mana and only had 2 power, then your interest would turn into "unplayable". That's pretty much what I stated in my comment, don't know what's unclear about it.

The part where you asked for someone to ask the Jund player how good it was in the tourney, my sides went into orbit.

Arsenal

12-16-2013, 04:44 PM

The part where you asked for someone to ask the Jund player how good it was in the tourney, my sides went into orbit.

So an obscure, unplayable card is played (now found out to be untrue, but I was going off of danyul's post that it was legit) in a deck that places well and asking about it's relevancy is something to laugh at?

TsumiBand

12-16-2013, 04:44 PM

To be fair, Sidewinder Sliver would probably work better in Slivers - but then, you could just run more flyer Slivers and completely ignore TNN.

Why not run Slivers instead? Crystalline Sliver laughs at any spot removal (or Jitte counters trying to -1/-1, for the matter), flyers grant a decent clock, stop Delver and ignore TNN as a blocker while Harmonic Sliver shits all over SFM and equipment shenanigans.

Come on, don't be shitty. It's Flankingflanking.dec. Flanking is the Duran of Magic; it's always better in multiples.

Dice_Box

12-16-2013, 04:50 PM

danyul

12-16-2013, 04:54 PM

mini1337s

12-16-2013, 04:56 PM

mini1337s

12-16-2013, 04:57 PM

Also, Cockatrice is vastly superior to Sylvan Basilisk XD
http://8e8460c4912582c4e519-11fcbfd88ed5b90cfb46edba899033c9.r65.cf1.rackcdn.com/sales/cardscans/MTG/LEA/en/nonfoil/Cockatrice.jpg

EDIT: OH WAIT FLYING! AHHHH, there goes my Alpha tech.

Arsenal

12-16-2013, 05:00 PM

Batterskull is only an issue for those not smart enough to run maindeck Art hate, something the deck has easy access too, DRS made me run Tarfire main so that's that issue solved and TNN does what exactly to the best Anti Blue creature ever printed? You are going to block my Goblin hitting you for 15 with a blue card? I don't think that's likely.

So that's why Goblins is beating all those UWx SFM-Batterskull decks, BGx Deathrite Shaman decks, and now all of those SFM-Batterskull + Deathrite Shaman + TNN decks. Silly me, Tuktuk Scrapper, Tarfire and Goblin Piledriver has solved the format. Goblins is just a hair above Zoo and Dragon Stompy in terms of relevance. Look at this month's data if you'd like.

Bed Decks Palyer

12-16-2013, 05:06 PM

So an obscure, unplayable card is played (now found out to be untrue, but I was going off of danyul's post that it was legit) in a deck that places well and asking about it's relevancy is something to laugh at?

Of course. Welcome to the Source: your source for laughing at others because community and mature people...

Come on, don't be shitty. It's Flankingflanking.dec. Flanking is the Duran of Magic; it's always better in multiples.
Tsumi, I really like the deck. It's Tier 3 at best and it will always be, but there's hardly anything to spoil/invent when building a Boros deck. I like the KotHN. It's super annoying and the fact that one may just play it then never care of it is invaluable. Yep, you read it... invaluable.

My build for comparison:

Qty Name
// Lands
4 Arid Mesa
4 Plateau
1 Sacred Foundry
3 Clifftop Retreat
3 Plains
4 Mountain
//\\
// Creatures
1 Telim'Tor
4 Sidewinder Sliver
4 Knight of the Holy Nimbus
4 Knight of Valor
3 Zhalfirin Crusader
3 Cavalry Master
//\\
// Spells
2 Crackdown
2 Invasion Plans
2 Sunforger
4 Enlightened Tutor
4 Path to Exile
4 Lightning Helix
4 Skullcrack
//\\
// Sideboard
3 Orim's Chant
3 Ethersworn Canonist
3 Thalia, Guardian of Thraben
3 Tormod's Crypt
3 Pithing Needle

For testing purposes I switched to fully powered version with Plateaus.

Dice_Box

12-16-2013, 05:09 PM

So that's why Goblins is beating all those UWx SFM-Batterskull decks, BGx Deathrite Shaman decks, and now all of those SFM-Batterskull + Deathrite Shaman + TNN decks. Silly me, Tuktuk Scrapper, Tarfire and Goblin Piledriver has solved the format. Goblins is just a hair above Zoo and Dragon Stompy in terms of relevance. Look at this month's data if you'd like.
Goblins has had a good year, they are also a strong meta choice, like Fish. The meta shifts and it takes its place, it shifts back. Just like Fish, just like SnT, hell a bit like a fairly large amount of decks.

Feaor

12-16-2013, 05:14 PM

In defense of gullibility, we have all seen crazy lists in Top 8s with subpar and strange choices. I have enough of an open mind to give these lists the benefit of the doubt. If based on all available evidence it appeared that a subpar card had performed well, then my first instinct would be curiosity rather than outright disdain.

Yea I was a little bit baffled why it was there until I realized that maybe it was a really wacky answer to TNN, I've seen some crazy stuff before in legacy so I wouldn't be that surprised, just curious as to how they arrived at that. People have won a SCG Open playing cards like Spectral Flight and Troll Ascetic, if you asked me if either of those cards were remotely legacy playable before that I would have said absolutely not.

I am curious to see if the people who don't think TNN should be banned would have liked TNN not to have been printed in the first place. Or does anyone actually thing TNN being printed is actually a good thing for Legacy and why? I feel like most players fall into the category of not really liking the card but are divided on whether or not it should be banned.

Bed Decks Palyer

12-16-2013, 05:33 PM

I don't like it, but I don't think it deserves ban. At least not now, several weeks after it seen the light of day.

There are pretty powerful cards in Legacy. I may think of at least dozen of cards that might be too powerful/annoying:
Brainstorm. It unmulligans.
Jace TMS. Too flexible, too powerful
Goyf. Evolutionary dead end.
Delver. Too powerful, shitty design
SFM. Might be too powerful, CA.
S&T. Enables broken things
LED. Black Lotus, maybe...
Griselbrand. Bargain with lifelink, very reasonable card.
fetches. Multicolored decks are a norm.

I'm not saying that these are broken and that Legacy would be better of them and that this and that that. And I ask the usual trigger-happies to overcome the desire to fire of all the "noob, diz iz legacy, go play modren" and "dude, buy goyfs instead of whinning" post. Again: I'm not saying these cards are ban-worthy and I don't cry about their power just because I don't own them and wanna spoil other people's fun. It's just that these cards are the most usually spoken about, when it comes to B&R discussions. Aslo, I own pretty much everything. Except for TNNs.
I'm not sure if TNN is on the level of say JTMS. Or LED. Or w/e. Is it stupid design? Yes, it is. So is Delver. Is it powerful creature? so is Goyf, and while Goyf is more fragile, it costs less. And unopposed Goyf kills faster... unless there's RiP in play, of course. So lets give that card a chance. I'm not seeing how it stifles diversity. The DTB is twelve or decks. I remember when it was ANT, RUG, Reanimator, Survival. Or something like that. So where's the trouble?

matunos

12-16-2013, 05:34 PM

I have yet to see anti-TNN maindeck cards in a top 8/16 deck. I mean bad players do bad things but I've played vs. someone before and gotten blown out because they maindecked Mindbreak Trap, that doesn't say anything about the power of combo though, just that some people are that stupid and once every 5 rounds it might pay off for them.

A few of the top decks at SCG Vegas (both in the invi and the open) had tech like Golgari Charm (ex. Thea's Jund list) and Diabolic Edict (Uppal's Deathblade list) maindeck. These were surely motivated in part by TNN.

Several other decks had edicts in the SB where I'm pretty sure they didn't tend to before.

I would not say, however, that this alone shows TNN is that bad.

Star|Scream

12-16-2013, 05:48 PM

It's so weird how everyone said it was going to dominate the format, but then when you show them a top 16 that is similar to what we had BEFORE it was printed, they say that it's warping the format. What they really mean to say is that it is changing the format much like Delver, Deathrite, Tarmogoyf, etc. But it's not dominating. So can we all just stop this?

Esper3k

12-16-2013, 07:17 PM

I like how RUG has all of the sudden become a True-Name Nemesis deck because lists are starting to run 1-2 of in the sideboard.

Also, I guess all the Jund players didn't get the memo about how TNN auto-wins against their deck.

Feaor

12-16-2013, 07:36 PM

Arsenal

12-16-2013, 08:18 PM

Megadeus

12-16-2013, 08:44 PM

prateta

12-16-2013, 08:49 PM

Goblins was put on life support when Batterskull was printed, died when Deathrite Shaman was printed and was buried when TNN was printed. Goblins isn't a factor in the meta anymore.

Wow, you sir have no understanding of the current meta. As a long-time goblin player I can tell you - batterskull is hardly a problem for goblins. Jitte with counters is a problem, Batterskull is more likely a joke. Most lists play at least 5-6 cards maindeck to deal with it (batter). DRS? Current goblins are mostly played with W splash -> there goes 4x RIP SB, shaman becomes a bear. Plus 2-3 tarfires MD and other removal to shoot him first/second turn. And TNN? Come on, you're joking here. 3 damage per turn, cool, nice clock. But goblins are much faster. TNN + jitte? That's a problem. But again... goblins live and die with sideboard these days. And we recently got excellent sideboard cards, Wear//Tear can suck your jitte TNN all day long :-)

In current meta the biggest enemies of goblins are combo decks as it had always been. TNN is annoying, so is DRS but there are much more powerfull cards against goblins. Therefore to say goblins have been burried by printing TNN is just plain wrong and shows your lousy knowledge of legacy.

Esper3k

12-16-2013, 08:52 PM

Esper, I'm still waiting on your magical definition of "interaction" that seemingly no one else knows. Also, I like how you edited my post about how Basilisk is unplayable due to it's 5cc cost and it's 2 power, but hey, whatever little battles you can win, right?

Hey, I'm just following your shining example of editing posts - one good turn deserves another. I also like how you're now trying to pretend as if you didn't believe Basilisk was playable in your post. Nice try at a dodge there, but you already got called out on that one too.

You TNN haters are already reduced to nebulous "unfun" and "uninteractive" arguments as Legacy once again shows how resilient it is as a format and adapts. I understand your need to divert attention away from the fact that the TNN Apocalypse is not upon us and I'm feeling particularly generous tonight, so I'll meander a ways down your side path.

"Interaction" is one sided. Bjholmes3 gets it. When you counter someone's spell, you interacted with them, they didn't interact with you.

Again, you never answered how "interactive" it is for your opponent when you counter all their spells and kill all their creatures. That's why most players love playing against control decks - all the interaction, right?

Esper3k

12-16-2013, 08:55 PM

I'm pretty sure any matchup is winnable if you can bring 11 cards for that matchup :rolleyes:

Links to decks that have 11 cards in the board that don't do anything except deal with TNN?

Esper3k

12-16-2013, 08:58 PM

Wow, you sir have no understanding of the current meta. As a long-time goblin player I can tell you - batterskull is hardly a problem for goblins. Jitte with counters is a problem, Batterskull is more likely a joke. Most lists play at least 5-6 cards maindeck to deal with it (batter). DRS? Current goblins are mostly played with W splash -> there goes 4x RIP SB, shaman becomes a bear. Plus 2-3 tarfires MD and other removal to shoot him first/second turn. And TNN? Come on, you're joking here. 3 damage per turn, cool, nice clock. But goblins are much faster. TNN + jitte? That's a problem. But again... goblins live and die with sideboard these days. And we recently got excellent sideboard cards, Wear//Tear can suck your jitte TNN all day long :-)

In current meta the biggest enemies of goblins are combo decks as it had always been. TNN is annoying, so is DRS but there are much more powerfull cards against goblins. Therefore to say goblins have been burried by printing TNN is just plain wrong and shows your lousy knowledge of legacy.

I'm not a fan of goblins, but I do think it's a shame they don't have a goblin that can attack past a TNN for a bunch of damage. (http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=40193)

Arsenal

12-16-2013, 09:13 PM

I didn't get called out in anything you putz. I stated that a creature that doesn't die to Abrupt Decay or Lighnting Bolt while able to swing through a TNN is good. But it's bad once you find out it costs 5 mana and it only has 2 power. Read to succeed Esper, read to succeed.

And lol at all these butthurt Goblin players thinking their deck matters. Even with all of the "adaptations", you're still just above Zoo in terms of meta relevance. If Goblins is soooo good at combating Batterskull, DRS and TNN, then why are you not consistently at the top tables like the aforementioned cards/decks are? Why is Goblins not in the top 5 placing decks month in and out?

Esper3k

12-16-2013, 09:16 PM

Arsenal

12-16-2013, 09:19 PM

prateta

12-16-2013, 09:44 PM

And lol at all these butthurt Goblin players thinking their deck matters. Even with all of the "adaptations", you're still just above Zoo in terms of meta relevance. If Goblins is soooo good at combating Batterskull, DRS and TNN, then why are you not consistently at the top tables like the aforementioned cards/decks are? Why is Goblins not in the top 5 placing decks month in and out?

Goblins are strong against aforementioned decks, but last time I've checked these are not only in the meta. Maybe goblins have no problems with control/tempo decks but they lose to combo and other decks? That's my case for sure. I beat canadian, TNNs, Delvers and then I lose to Belcher t1. Or elves, D&T, MUD.

Batterskull, TNN or DRS are definitely not the cards that weakened goblins and kicked them out of DTB. I guess it'd be how the whole format slowly changed. We still beat tempo and controls but we often lose to other combo or creature-based decks.

Arsenal

12-16-2013, 09:50 PM

Wha? A creature deck loses to combo? Well, I never! Also, I call bs that the only reason Goblins is at Dragon Stompy relevance is due to combo.

prateta

12-16-2013, 09:54 PM

Wha? A creature deck loses to combo?

Before SB... yes. After SB it's mostly fair match, depends on luck a lot.

Goblins is at Dragon Stompy relevance

You really don't like goblins, do you :-) check top8 stats from last months. Goblins did some top8 but I see no Dragon Stompy in there. However we can agree on that the deck ain't that strong as it used to be, it's still playable and can consistently defeat many of current tier 1s.

Arsenal

12-16-2013, 09:57 PM

I own Goblins, I like it, but I don't delude myself into thinking it's something it's not. Also, Dragon Stompy can blow out tier 1 decks too (CotV @ 1 vs RUG Delver), but that doesn't make it relevant.

prateta

12-16-2013, 09:59 PM

I own Goblins, I like it, but I delude myself into thinking it's something it's not. Also, Dragon Stompy can blow out tier 1 decks too (CotV @ 1 vs RUG Delver), but that doesn't make it relevant.

Goblins also play COTV (SB). I never said goblins are tier 1, I just couldn't agree with your statement that it was TNN/DRS/Batter what made them Tier 2.

Arsenal

12-16-2013, 10:07 PM

They did (Goyf started it actually), but if you think that combo is the reason Goblins is at Zoo-level relevance, okay.

bjholmes3

12-16-2013, 11:00 PM

HSCK

12-16-2013, 11:26 PM

I think we should let this keep going so certain users can pontificate on how good Sylvan Basilisk is.

Megadeus

12-16-2013, 11:45 PM

The card is not as warping as some people make it out to be. I honestly hate the fucking card with a passion, but the card has helped to shift the meta. I mean it is like, if maverick and other BG Strategies became prevalent, then people may run Sword of Feast and Famine in their stoneforge packages to get through KOTRs and Goyfs. Now people are running SoFaI to get through TNN. It isn't necessarily a full on warping of the meta, just a changing of the guard. I for one would like a few more maindeckable ways for decks to beat TNN, but maybe a shift of deck choice will help to curb the number of TNNs I will have to stare down. For me though? I'll just play deed and laugh at the equipment and TNN himself.

Megadeus

12-16-2013, 11:48 PM

Also the difference in Zoo and Goblins is that Goblins has a higher number of people playing the deck right now. And it still can take down a tourney given the right MUs as can any T2 deck.

Lord Seth

12-17-2013, 12:39 AM

They did (Goyf started it actually), but if you think that combo is the reason Goblins is at Zoo-level relevance, okay.While Goblins is Tier 2, it's quite a bit above Zoo in terms of meta relevance. Merfolk would probably be a more accurate comparison than Zoo.

ESG

12-17-2013, 03:22 AM

About statements regarding TNN taking away the combat step, a part of Magic "wholly devoted to interaction of players by means of creatures" ... What TNN does to the combat step, Chalice of the Void does to the rest of the turn. What have you to say about things like Silence, Orim's Chant, counters, discard, Trinisphere, etc.? These take away a part of Magic solely devoted to players casting spells and "interacting" with each other. :rolleyes:

Incidentally, Trinisphere was restricted in Vintage because of reducing interaction, so your comparison is close in a way.

The official explanation from Aaron Forsythe in 2005:
"Trinisphere is a nasty card, no bones about it. It does ridiculous things in Vintage, especially combined with Mishra's Workshop. As I've said in a previous column, we almost restricted it before it was even released.

Now that it has been floating around for a while, the Vintage crowd understands that the card does good things for the format, and bad things to the format. While it does serve a role of keeping combo decks in check, it also randomly destroys people on turn one, with little recourse other than Force of Will. And those games end up labeled with that heinous word—unfun. Not just “I lost” unfun, but “Why did I even come here to play?” unfun. The power level of the card is no jokes either, which is a big reason why I don't feel bad about its restriction.

Vintage, like the other formats with large card pools, always runs the risk of becoming non-interactive, meaning the games are little more than both players “goldfishing” to see who can win first."

Interaction and fun were key metrics in the decision, not tournament dominance, as some people think all banned cards must achieve.

Nielsie

12-17-2013, 03:47 AM

I am a big fan of Goblins but I am sorry, the moment Max Tietze stopped playing it and now Jim Davis writing articles that it's time for something else, I get the memo...

Again, I feel like repeating myself. The big problem with TNN is not TNN itself, it's not TNN with Batterskull, it's TNN with Jitte. This combination is so deadly against aggro and non-TNN midrange. Sure you can load up on equipment hate but that does not take away that many strategies against Jitte that worked before are now for the garbage bin. You can't block with a goblin and in response blow it up with Skirk Prospector or Siege Gang anymore. You can't rely on Incenerator anymore. You will face a lot more boardwipes than before. I don't see how this is healthy for Goblins and other non-TNN midrange strategies. Not to mention many players falling back on combo to ignore TNN.

dontbiteitholmes

12-17-2013, 04:32 AM

Incidentally, Trinisphere was restricted in Vintage because of reducing interaction, so your comparison is close in a way.

The official explanation from Aaron Forsythe in 2005:
"Trinisphere is a nasty card, no bones about it. It does ridiculous things in Vintage, especially combined with Mishra's Workshop. As I've said in a previous column, we almost restricted it before it was even released.

Now that it has been floating around for a while, the Vintage crowd understands that the card does good things for the format, and bad things to the format. While it does serve a role of keeping combo decks in check, it also randomly destroys people on turn one, with little recourse other than Force of Will. And those games end up labeled with that heinous word—unfun. Not just “I lost” unfun, but “Why did I even come here to play?” unfun. The power level of the card is no jokes either, which is a big reason why I don't feel bad about its restriction.

Vintage, like the other formats with large card pools, always runs the risk of becoming non-interactive, meaning the games are little more than both players “goldfishing” to see who can win first."

Interaction and fun were key metrics in the decision, not tournament dominance, as some people think all banned cards must achieve.

There is a big difference between the lack of interaction in TNN and the lack of interaction in a turn 1 3sphere where the opponent often never casts a spell for the entire game.

On another note is anyone else suspicious of the handful of new accounts that all registered at the same time and that only pop up in this thread?

Echelon

12-17-2013, 04:39 AM

On another note is anyone else suspicious of the handful of new accounts that all registered at the same time and that only pop up in this thread?

Try and see if there are similarities between the writing styles, lol. Maybe it's an evil plot :laugh:

Higgs

12-17-2013, 04:48 AM

Incidentally, Trinisphere was restricted in Vintage because of reducing interaction, so your comparison is close in a way.

The official explanation from Aaron Forsythe in 2005:
"Trinisphere is a nasty card, no bones about it. It does ridiculous things in Vintage, especially combined with Mishra's Workshop. As I've said in a previous column, we almost restricted it before it was even released.

Now that it has been floating around for a while, the Vintage crowd understands that the card does good things for the format, and bad things to the format. While it does serve a role of keeping combo decks in check, it also randomly destroys people on turn one, with little recourse other than Force of Will. And those games end up labeled with that heinous word—unfun. Not just “I lost” unfun, but “Why did I even come here to play?” unfun. The power level of the card is no jokes either, which is a big reason why I don't feel bad about its restriction.

Vintage, like the other formats with large card pools, always runs the risk of becoming non-interactive, meaning the games are little more than both players “goldfishing” to see who can win first."

Interaction and fun were key metrics in the decision, not tournament dominance, as some people think all banned cards must achieve.

Very nice post. For me, the TNN meta and games involving TNN became so much unfun to the point of thinking "why am I playing this?", I started fooling around with EDH lately. I just don't feel like partaking in this nonsense.

dontbiteitholmes

12-17-2013, 05:53 AM

Look if you guys don't like TNN and think it's uninteractive that's fine, but seriously don't even try comparing it to turn 1 Trinisphere. Not even close.

Bed Decks Palyer

12-17-2013, 06:11 AM

Esper, do you even know how to read? Do your eyes not "interact" with the text on your monitor?

Maybe (s)he has protection from monitor?

Also, I dislike how MWS crowd feels the urge to write a note "you" on their TNNs. Like, you know... who else should be chosen? "TNN has now protection from your dog!" Or maybe from some other pair of players on the other server?
I guess these are the same trolls/morons that loved to EOT open their Autumn Willows to tapped-out opponents. I loved to immediatelly play Contagion on their 4/4 and then watch them redden with anger.

Look if you guys don't like TNN and think it's uninteractive that's fine, but seriously don't even try comparing it to turn 1 Trinisphere. Not even close.
all I got from ESG's post is that he showed us an example of card ben banned becasue it's unfun. It has nothing to do with 3ball-TNN similarity in power level, it's about cards been banned coz they suck at been funny. Am I right? :really:

Feaor

12-17-2013, 06:22 AM

Links to decks that have 11 cards in the board that don't do anything except deal with TNN?

I never said that all 11 cards were specifically to deal with TNN, but the 2nd place Jund list (http://sales.starcitygames.com//deckdatabase/displaydeck.php?DeckID=61478) plays 11 cards in the board which can be brought in to deal with TNN or Equipment. Now I don't actually know his sideboard plan so I'm not sure that all of those cards come in, but I would guess that the four cards that are obviously in the board to deal with TNN (Charm, Edict) and the 3 blasts and then probably at least one of the Grudges. Now most of these cards are flexible enough that they are reasonable to good in other match ups but I think its pretty clearly his sideboard is setup to beat the TNN + SFM decks, heck even his main deck is setup to fight TNN better, it drops Bolt as it does nothing against TNN for IoK to have more ways of potentially dealing with it preboard. Also in the 5th place Jund list (http://sales.starcitygames.com//deckdatabase/displaydeck.php?DeckID=61492) played 5 cards to deal with TNN and then its has things like Blasts and Grudge for that match up as well. He's also got a main deck LftL so I'm guessing his plan in g1 was to try and Waste lock them so they can't cast TNN. I think its pretty clear that these Jund lists are set up to beat the TNN decks which is pretty crazy since they should be naturally good against fair blue decks.

BVB09

12-17-2013, 06:32 AM

Maybe the problem is not TNN and it's Jitte?
TNN in Merfolk seems fine. He is a Merfolk, and it's reasonable that he's a good inclusion for a Merfolk deck.
However, most of you say that's the problem is when it's combined with equipment. Most of us agree that a indestructible 3/1 is not a problem on it's own. (That's why it only sees play in UWx decks with equipment and Merfolk with Lords and Phantasmal Image) (Only a few UGr bring 1-2 on the SB, a terrible decision in my experience, and Team America has stopped running them)
Do you think TNN + Battersull is the problem? Probably not, Batterskull is already a good card by it's own. It they can play 9 mana to SFM, lay Batterskull and equip it, they probably deserve that 7/5 don't you think?
TNN + Swords of X and Y are a problem? I doubt it. I think those are fair equipments, they are slow and with the exception of SoFI they don't have unfair efects. An equiped Mirran crusader is probably more devastating.
The real problem is Jitte. I would say the problem in fact is SFM, which shuts down a LOT of fair aggro decks. Having 5 copies of Jitte maindeck it's quite a problem for creature decks.
No one likes Jitte, even less with the rules change. I think Jitte is oppresive, unfun, and yes, VERY interactive. But I can't be the one who prefers an uninteractive 3/1 for 3, than a really interactive card for 2 that makes you lay down in your sit and wait for a miracle.
Am I the only want how thinks Jitte is the problem? I read this thread often but I haven't checked every post.

Echelon

12-17-2013, 07:15 AM

Meh, Jitte is too easy to hate out to be worth a ban. And this comes from an Elves-player.

Sure, TNN or Mirren Crusader + Jitte is a nasty combination, but still... It's only a creature with an equipment and probably won't hit the board in that form until turn 4 or even 5. Seriously. Jitte is a great equipment, but not Skullclamp-broken.

dontbiteitholmes

12-17-2013, 07:34 AM

all I got from ESG's post is that he showed us an example of card ben banned becasue it's unfun. It has nothing to do with 3ball-TNN similarity in power level, it's about cards been banned coz they suck at been funny. Am I right? :really:

Yeah again you can't really compare the unfun of a 3/1 pro-you creature to the unfun of never being able to play a spell for a game of Magic that lasts 5+ turns.

As an occasional Vintage MUD player I can say with some certainty that turn 1 Trinisphere almost feels like an autowin unless they are playing the mirror or Dredge. I almost feel bad when it sticks because it certainly doesn't seem like fun for the other person.

Higgs

12-17-2013, 08:19 AM

Yeah again you can't really compare the unfun of X to the unfun of Y.

I think you are aware that this is pure personal opinion.

HSCK

12-17-2013, 08:54 AM

I never said that all 11 cards were specifically to deal with TNN, but the 2nd place Jund list (http://sales.starcitygames.com//deckdatabase/displaydeck.php?DeckID=61478) plays 11 cards in the board which can be brought in to deal with TNN or Equipment. Now I don't actually know his sideboard plan so I'm not sure that all of those cards come in, but I would guess that the four cards that are obviously in the board to deal with TNN (Charm, Edict) and the 3 blasts and then probably at least one of the Grudges. Now most of these cards are flexible enough that they are reasonable to good in other match ups but I think its pretty clearly his sideboard is setup to beat the TNN + SFM decks, heck even his main deck is setup to fight TNN better, it drops Bolt as it does nothing against TNN for IoK to have more ways of potentially dealing with it preboard. Also in the 5th place Jund list (http://sales.starcitygames.com//deckdatabase/displaydeck.php?DeckID=61492) played 5 cards to deal with TNN and then its has things like Blasts and Grudge for that match up as well. He's also got a main deck LftL so I'm guessing his plan in g1 was to try and Waste lock them so they can't cast TNN. I think its pretty clear that these Jund lists are set up to beat the TNN decks which is pretty crazy since they should be naturally good against fair blue decks.

You forgot your amazing Basilisk tech....

I'm pretty sure they were doing similar things anyway, those Jund lists aren't all that off from what they've been for months. And oh no, there's a new good card, and they added a couple SB slots, definitely ban material.

Feaor

12-17-2013, 09:09 AM

You forgot your amazing Basilisk tech....

I'm pretty sure they were doing similar things anyway, those Jund lists aren't all that off from what they've been for months. And oh no, there's a new good card, and they added a couple SB slots, definitely ban material.

I don't know why I even bother, you're pretty blind if you don't see a noticeable shift in deck construction post TNN. The various TNN decks are still obviously the best decks in the format, they've been pretty much crushing stateside, they've only lost won tournament with 100+ players so far and made the finals in every tournament so far.

HSCK

12-17-2013, 09:37 AM

Feaor

12-17-2013, 09:45 AM

Of course the meta has changed, no one's arguing that it's a bad card and wouldn't change the meta, but it's not warping the format to unhealthy levels...at least statistically. When you go out of you way to defend Sylvan Basilisk as a real card because of your distaste for TNN it's easy to see who plays Legacy and who doesn't.

And I thought the Source would be full mature people but it turns out its the same elitist manchildren as every other online forum, nice Ad Hominem by the way, trying to discredit anything I say by bringing something irrelevant.

Esper3k

12-17-2013, 09:45 AM

Esper, do you even know how to read? Do your eyes not "interact" with the text on your monitor?

The way you squirm and wiggle trying to make it seem like you didn't fall for the obvious trolling is hilarious. Keep up the faith though, maybe someone will believe you! Maybe one day, our new TNN overlords will sweep across the format like a watery blue plague and then you can go out onto the street holding up the cardboard sign you have ready to announce the apocalypse is upon us... and SYLVAN BASILISK is our Savior!

The card is not as warping as some people make it out to be. I honestly hate the fucking card with a passion, but the card has helped to shift the meta. I mean it is like, if maverick and other BG Strategies became prevalent, then people may run Sword of Feast and Famine in their stoneforge packages to get through KOTRs and Goyfs. Now people are running SoFaI to get through TNN. It isn't necessarily a full on warping of the meta, just a changing of the guard. I for one would like a few more maindeckable ways for decks to beat TNN, but maybe a shift of deck choice will help to curb the number of TNNs I will have to stare down. For me though? I'll just play deed and laugh at the equipment and TNN himself.

It's really just a difference of degree for the same thing when people talking about "warping" vs "shifting". At which point does one become the other?

all I got from ESG's post is that he showed us an example of card ben banned becasue it's unfun. It has nothing to do with 3ball-TNN similarity in power level, it's about cards been banned coz they suck at been funny. Am I right? :really:

Where did the quote on the banning mention fun? It said it was ridiculous, not unfun. In context, as others have pointed out, 4 Trinispheres in a deck that runs 5 Black Lotuses and has numerous other ways to generate 3+ mana on T1 in a format primarily focused on 0-1 drops is indeed very ridiculous. You're trying to compare -that- to TNN?

I never said that all 11 cards were specifically to deal with TNN, but the 2nd place Jund list (http://sales.starcitygames.com//deckdatabase/displaydeck.php?DeckID=61478) plays 11 cards in the board which can be brought in to deal with TNN or Equipment. Now I don't actually know his sideboard plan so I'm not sure that all of those cards come in, but I would guess that the four cards that are obviously in the board to deal with TNN (Charm, Edict) and the 3 blasts and then probably at least one of the Grudges. Now most of these cards are flexible enough that they are reasonable to good in other match ups but I think its pretty clearly his sideboard is setup to beat the TNN + SFM decks, heck even his main deck is setup to fight TNN better, it drops Bolt as it does nothing against TNN for IoK to have more ways of potentially dealing with it preboard. Also in the 5th place Jund list (http://sales.starcitygames.com//deckdatabase/displaydeck.php?DeckID=61492) played 5 cards to deal with TNN and then its has things like Blasts and Grudge for that match up as well. He's also got a main deck LftL so I'm guessing his plan in g1 was to try and Waste lock them so they can't cast TNN. I think its pretty clear that these Jund lists are set up to beat the TNN decks which is pretty crazy since they should be naturally good against fair blue decks.

Trying to say that cards that deal with equipment, REBs, or additional Edict effects are purely because of TNN when those cards were played before is a real stretch. Sure, many of those cards got better with more people playing Equipment and Blue decks, but those cards were already good before. And really? You really think LFTL is really against TNN? Jund's game plan against a resolved TNN is more often going to be "kill all their other guys and make him sacrifice it with Liliana" or the "Abrupt Decay Jitte and race it", not relying on the 1-of LFTL to try and somehow Wasteland off of 3 mana.

You're trying to make it sound like Jund has had to change a bunch to adapt to TNN when it really hasn't. Jund is already naturally good against TNN decks due to all the built in hand disruption and Lilianas on top of the sideboard cards it already played. It doesn't have to change much to get even better against them.

Bed Decks Palyer

12-17-2013, 09:54 AM

Maybe the problem is not TNN and it's Jitte?
...
The real problem is Jitte. I would say the problem in fact is SFM, which shuts down a LOT of fair aggro decks. Having 5 copies of Jitte maindeck it's quite a problem for creature decks.
No one likes Jitte, even less with the rules change. I think Jitte is oppresive, unfun, and yes, VERY interactive. But I can't be the one who prefers an uninteractive 3/1 for 3, than a really interactive card for 2 that makes you lay down in your sit and wait for a miracle.
Am I the only want how thinks Jitte is the problem? I read this thread often but I haven't checked every post.
I'm the one who thinks that the trouble with TNN is in equipments, esp. in Jitte. Also, I should have listed it in my "Top dozen Legacy cards", but I forgot about it. Btw, I like how you've described Jitte, it is very interactive card, yet it might be quite unfunny for some players.
I don't think SFM (and even less Jitte) are bannable, but the fact is that five Jittes make the aggro decks dead. Otoh, should I mourn this? We're playing Legacy.
Also, Jitte or not, TNN design is stupid. But I don't mind the card... yet. Maybe in future! But for now I don't care of this Troll Ascetic.

Yeah again you can't really compare the unfun of a 3/1 pro-you creature to the unfun of never being able to play a spell for a game of Magic that lasts 5+ turns.

As an occasional Vintage MUD player I can say with some certainty that turn 1 Trinisphere almost feels like an autowin unless they are playing the mirror or Dredge. I almost feel bad when it sticks because it certainly doesn't seem like fun for the other person.

"Protection: monitor" again?

Why do you quote me? I wrote that I think that ESG wrote about 3ball to make an example of card been banned becasue it's unfun.
Nowhere I made any comparison between power level and brokeness and unfun factor of both.

Reading. It's da tech. Since liek for ever.

You're trying to compare Trinisphere to TNN?

Troll elsewhere, child. Oh, and welcome to my ignore list.

Feaor

12-17-2013, 10:02 AM

Trying to say that cards that deal with equipment, REBs, or additional Edict effects are purely because of TNN when those cards were played before is a real stretch. Sure, many of those cards got better with more people playing Equipment and Blue decks, but those cards were already good before. And really? You really think LFTL is really against TNN? Jund's game plan against a resolved TNN is more often going to be "kill all their other guys and make him sacrifice it with Liliana" or the "Abrupt Decay Jitte and race it", not relying on the 1-of LFTL to try and somehow Wasteland off of 3 mana.

You're trying to make it sound like Jund has had to change a bunch to adapt to TNN when it really hasn't. Jund is already naturally good against TNN decks due to all the built in hand disruption and Lilianas on top of the sideboard cards it already played. It doesn't have to change much to get even better against them.

Holy crap did you actually read my post? I never said that they were all to deal with TNN, I was merely refuting your statement that Jund Forgot that it Autoloses to TNN by stating that any matchup can be won if you can bring in up to 11 cards that are good in that matchup. I bet I could build Jund to be strong against any deck if I had that many cards to bring in. Plus it still lost in the finals to a deck its supposed to be good at, and the last open it didn't break top 16, I'd hardly say that Jund is well positioned in the current meta without a lot of hate for TNN as TNN is certainly a nightmare for them if they can't deal with it quickly.

Arsenal

12-17-2013, 10:18 AM

The way you squirm and wiggle trying to make it seem like you didn't fall for the obvious trolling is hilarious. Keep up the faith though, maybe someone will believe you! Maybe one day, our new TNN overlords will sweep across the format like a watery blue plague and then you can go out onto the street holding up the cardboard sign you have ready to announce the apocalypse is upon us... and SYLVAN BASILISK is our Savior!

If it's legit, the reasoning behind it is fairly sound. Not dying to Deathblade's Abrupt Decay and Patriot's Lightning Bolt, while forcing through damage through the TNN wall seems decent-ish. However, probably not for 5 mana and when you only get 2 points across, but eat at least 3 on the backswing. Can you get more information from the Jund player as to how relevant/good/bad it was throughout his tourney?

Wanting to play a creature that doesn't die to Abrupt Decay, Lightning Bolt and that can swing through a TNN wall is decent. But once you find out it costs 5 mana and you're only pushing 2 points across, it doesn't sound as good. But if it's played (which it wasn't, but at the time I was under the impression it was actually played), I wanted to know how relevant/good/bad it was for the player. What are you not understanding?

Esper3k

12-17-2013, 10:45 AM

Oh, and welcome to my ignore list.

You thought asking you to back up where your "unfun" reasoning came from is trolling? Rofl. Time to pick up your ball and go home, huh? Game, set, match.

Holy crap did you actually read my post? I never said that they were all to deal with TNN, I was merely refuting your statement that Jund Forgot that it Autoloses to TNN by stating that any matchup can be won if you can bring in up to 11 cards that are good in that matchup. I bet I could build Jund to be strong against any deck if I had that many cards to bring in. Plus it still lost in the finals to a deck its supposed to be good at, and the last open it didn't break top 16, I'd hardly say that Jund is well positioned in the current meta without a lot of hate for TNN as TNN is certainly a nightmare for them if they can't deal with it quickly.

I really need more [sarcasm] tags again then. That statement about Jund auto-losing to TNN was directed at all you TNN whiners about how all the creature based decks can't beat TNN, which they clearly can and as has been shown, without much change to them.

I wouldn't say Jund is well positioned in the meta, but that's not because of TNN, that would be because of combo being ever present in the format. Jund hasn't been popular since the spring/summer of this year, so saying it hasn't done well recently isn't saying much. The fact that it's actually been making more of a comeback recently (look at what the T8 players of the Invitationals chose to play, for example) is more of an argument that Jund likes its TNN matchup.

If you want to talk about Jund losing in the finals, didn't someone here earlier mention some mulls to 5 (the coverage on the website is spotty)? Also, consider the UWR player was Jacob Wilson playing against a relative unknown?

Wanting to play a creature that doesn't die to Abrupt Decay, Lightning Bolt and that can swing through a TNN wall is decent. But once you find out it costs 5 mana and you're only pushing 2 points across, it doesn't sound as good. But if it's played (which it wasn't, but at the time I was under the impression it was actually played), I wanted to know how relevant/good/bad it was for the player. What are you not understanding?

"If it's legit, the reasoning behind it is fairly sound." Uh huh, you totally didn't believe that this wasn't a typo or trolling. Gotcha. :rolleyes:

Arsenal

12-17-2013, 10:55 AM

Also, that is 99.9% a typo.

Yeah Esper, you really got me.

danyul

12-17-2013, 10:59 AM

Higgs

12-17-2013, 11:02 AM

"unfun" reasoning

Unfun reasoning? :confused: Dude I think you need to chill, you're not making sense.

This card is the most unfun thing I've seen in Magic in my life and I sure don't need a reasoning to feel a particular way. I'm fine with uninteractive combo decks because it's a strategy in itself. When a whole deck is designed to dodge interaction (say like dredge) it can get annoying but then the deck is built around that whole strategy. There are narrow answers for that sort of thing which deal with the core strategy of such decks and a lot of players don't enjoy (read don't have fun) playing against such decks with narrow hate cards. When you apply this to TNN, it is a single card which requires such narrow hate cards to be answered and it creates combo-like uninteractivity within interactive strategies. It's not a strategy itself, you just slap it into existing strategies. It feels ham-fisted, unbalanced and out of place. When it lands I start wondering why am I playing this stupid game of back and forth instead of Tendrils'ing their face on turn 2 and calling it a day.

I don't think I or anybody else needs to convince you or anyone else for how unfun this card feels to them. I've always been a blue player and since this card got printed I lost the appetite for Legacy and all sorts of blue aggo-control. At this point I don't think this card adds anything to the format as much as it takes from the format.

Esper3k

12-17-2013, 11:04 AM

EDIT: lol danyul, thanks for the information. If that is 100% legit, then it'll be funny to see how quickly the "it's rediculous!" crowd changes their tune to "see! i told you there were TNN answers and that the format will adapt!"

And here's another post of yours after Danyul posts about the FB response on it. You really expect people to believe you didn't think Basilisk was legit? Danyul manned up and admitted he got trolled (don't worry man, it happens to everyone!). Too bad you can't do the same...

Feaor

12-17-2013, 11:12 AM

And here's another post of yours after Danyul posts about the FB response on it. You really expect people to believe you didn't think Basilisk was legit? Danyul manned up and admitted he got trolled (don't worry man, it happens to everyone!). Too bad you can't do the same...

Does this actually add anything to the discussion? Maybe this thread needs to be locked for a bit for everyone to cool off, I think at this point pretty everything has been said for now.

Esper3k

12-17-2013, 11:12 AM

You guys were having a discussion like...7 pages ago. A legitimate discussion. But now you are just being dicks to each other.

At this point I don't know how constructive it is for the rest of us to read. You should take it to PM and wordfight there.

Dude, it's the internet. If there weren't people being assholes to each other, I'm pretty sure all the tubes would crash :eek:

Unfun reasoning? :confused: Dude I think you need to chill, you're not making sense.

This card is the most unfun thing I've seen in Magic in my life and I sure don't need a reasoning to feel a particular way. I'm fine with uninteractive combo decks because it's a strategy in itself. When a whole deck is designed to dodge interaction (say like dredge) it can get annoying but then the deck is built around that whole strategy. There are narrow answers for that sort of thing which deal with the core strategy of such decks and a lot of players don't enjoy (read don't have fun) playing against such decks with narrow hate cards. When you apply this to TNN, it is a single card which requires such narrow hate cards to be answered and it creates combo-like uninteractivity within interactive strategies. It's not a strategy itself, you just slap it into existing strategies. It feels ham-fisted, unbalanced and out of place. When it lands I start wondering why am I playing this stupid game of back and forth instead of Tendrils'ing their face on turn 2 and calling it a day.

I don't think I or anybody else needs to convince you or anyone else for how unfun this card feels to them. I've always been a blue player and since this card got printed I lost the appetite for Legacy and all sorts of blue aggo-control. At this point I don't think this card adds anything to the format as much as it takes from the format.

My statement was about him saying that Trinisphere was restricted because it was "unfun", which the quoted text from Forsythe didn't say anything about (just that it was ridiculous in Vintage).

Now for your own particular sentiments:

It's fine that you personally feel that it's unfun - to each their own. You don't need to convince me that you feel that it's unfun. However, if you're using that as a reason to argue for a ban on TNN, I do take issue with that. I believe "unfun" is such a nebulous and subjective criteria that using it as a reason to ban cards in Legacy is a bad path for the format to go down. Second, if you're going to also argue that because it's unfun, it should be banned, you then do need to convince others of why it's unfun if you're going to get them to agree with you.

Esper3k

12-17-2013, 11:14 AM

Does this actually add anything to the discussion? Maybe this thread needs to be locked for a bit for everyone to cool off, I think at this point pretty everything has been said for now.

Until 4 months later and a new poll starts up :tongue:

Arsenal

12-17-2013, 11:18 AM

Esper, this is the last post from me to you on this subject; I clearly stated "if that's 100% legit". At no point in time did I state that I was 100% sure that it was true, only if it was true would it be funny. I'm not quite sure what you're reading, but it's fairly obvious that I had major doubts that it truly was played. Again, if it was played (it wasn't, but I didn't know for certain one way or the other at the time), then I wanted to know how relevant/good/bad it was for the player; on one hand, a creature not dying to Abrupt Decay + Lightning Bolt while pushing through a TNN wall is good, but on the other hand, it costing 5 mana and only coming across for 2 is bad.

________________________________________________

Dedicated TNN decks have won the GP DC, SCG Dallas, SCG Oakland, a 186-player East Coast tourney featuring many top players, and has littered virtually every top 8 worth noting. Currently, the top 5 Legacy decks have 3 dedicated TNN decks sitting among them. I suppose time will tell if this is only the beginning of things to come or if the meta will get back to pre-TNN variety. I've been a Stoneblade player since the days of Cawblade, so while my deck is top tier again, Magic is simply less enjoyable for me.

This post by danyul sums up my feelings on the matter quite well:

People play combo because they want to interact as little as possible. People play fair because they want to interact as much as possible. Let's just assume these to be true for the sake of argument.

Now, people's troubles with TNN occur when, while playing a fair deck, they resolve a TNN and suddenly they feel like they are playing a combo deck in the sense that now they don't have to interact if they don't want to. Now you have forced a "fair" player into a gamestate where they feel like a "combo" player, and this weird feeling makes them uncomfortable because this is not how they intended to play the game. (I'm making a lot of assumptions here) This forced perspective shift feels to them, somewhat broken and wrong. If they had signed up to play broken shit ala combo from the start, then they would have perhaps gotten over this feeling from the moment they sleeved up their decks. But they didn't sign up for this combo mumbo jumbo. They wanted to play fair. And now that they are slamming TNNs, they just feel gross about it.

Higgs

12-17-2013, 11:20 AM

Second, if you're going to also argue that because it's unfun, it should be banned, you then do need to convince others of why it's unfun if you're going to get them to agree with you.

Nobody can convince anyone that anything is or should be fun, I think it would be a dead-end. What we can discuss however is, whether this card is adding anything new and exciting to the format and what it's taking away from the format. This is being argued for pages and not really going anywhere so I won't go there. We can also discuss whether this is a healthy 2-player constructed Magic card. For the second one, I think this card makes sense in a 2-player constructed format as much as ante and dexterity cards.

Star|Scream

12-17-2013, 11:28 AM

Esper3k

12-17-2013, 11:52 AM

First off, a deck that has 2 copies of the card is hardly "dedicated," and secondly all you're really saying is you don't like the card and you are upset that the card is good enough to make it into top decks. So you've made your point. Let's move on.

^^ This. Even looking at Oakland, Jacob Wilson's deck ran only 2 TNN in the main, 1 in the board. It's a -Delver- deck first, SFM second, and a TNN deck third.

Again, when people are starting to classify RUG as a "TNN deck" because they might run 1-2 in the sideboard, you know they're really stretching.

Zombie

12-17-2013, 11:59 AM

Please, people. This is a forum. Not the toilet. Diarrhea belongs elsewhere, as do dickhead contests.

Also, Esper, please read what people write. It feels like you've decided the opposition is a bunch of unthinking buffoons and therefore anything at all that comes out of their mouths must be absurd and not worth reading so you whip up some strawman of what you imagine they're saying. Please stop it. Reading your anti-strawman replies is painful.

Also, most of the TNN argument isn't about how it is the next Black Lotus, yet you constantly act as if that has been the claim all along. It's not.

It's about how the card is strong enough to see widespread play and just makes the games it is in less fun, and some matches an outright farce. It doesn't add anything interesting to the format.

Maybe the problem is not TNN and it's Jitte?

No one likes Jitte, even less with the rules change. I think Jitte is oppresive, unfun, and yes, VERY interactive. But I can't be the one who prefers an uninteractive 3/1 for 3, than a really interactive card for 2 that makes you lay down in your sit and wait for a miracle.
Am I the only want how thinks Jitte is the problem? I read this thread often but I haven't checked every post.

Jitte is a shit. But it's a shit card that can be blown up trivially, the carriers-to-be can be killed and decks have more esoteric ways of mitigating it like block-and-sac or block-and-bounce shenanigans with Gobs and Elves. The most important part is that it just dies to targeted removal. If I wanted to kill TNN, I'd have to basically kill my own deck or splash two colours for a narrow hate card that isn't worth it against most anything else. It's a world of difference from being able to play targeted removal.

Unfun reasoning? :confused: Dude I think you need to chill, you're not making sense.

This card is the most unfun thing I've seen in Magic in my life and I sure don't need a reasoning to feel a particular way. I'm fine with uninteractive combo decks because it's a strategy in itself. When a whole deck is designed to dodge interaction (say like dredge) it can get annoying but then the deck is built around that whole strategy. There are narrow answers for that sort of thing which deal with the core strategy of such decks and a lot of players don't enjoy (read don't have fun) playing against such decks with narrow hate cards. When you apply this to TNN, it is a single card which requires such narrow hate cards to be answered and it creates combo-like uninteractivity within interactive strategies. It's not a strategy itself, you just slap it into existing strategies. It feels ham-fisted, unbalanced and out of place. When it lands I start wondering why am I playing this stupid game of back and forth instead of Tendrils'ing their face on turn 2 and calling it a day.

I don't think I or anybody else needs to convince you or anyone else for how unfun this card feels to them. I've always been a blue player and since this card got printed I lost the appetite for Legacy and all sorts of blue aggo-control. At this point I don't think this card adds anything to the format as much as it takes from the format.

Worth adding that in cases like Storm and whatever, you usually don't have to worry about beating a whole different, strong strategy. Against Storm you can happily side out most of your not-anti-Warrens creature removal and bring in all manner of nastiness. Not quite so against Trueblade type decks.
You just play already good strategies and slap TNN in there as additional power and boredom.

Dedicated TNN decks have won the GP DC, SCG Dallas, SCG Oakland, a 186-player East Coast tourney featuring many top players, and has littered virtually every top 8 worth noting. Currently, the top 5 Legacy decks have 3 dedicated TNN decks sitting among them. I suppose time will tell if this is only the beginning of things to come or if the meta will get back to pre-TNN variety. I've been a Stoneblade player since the days of Cawblade, so while my deck is top tier again, Magic is simply less enjoyable for me.

Canadian is not a dedicated TNN deck. If any pack TNN, they typically do it in the side, not the main.

Higgs

12-17-2013, 12:00 PM

By playing removal, you reduce your opponent's interaction with you.

By playing countermagic, you reduce your opponent's interaction with you.

By playing evasive creatures, you reduce your opponent's interaction with you.

I'm not saying reducing your opponent's interaction with you is a bad thing - how much you want to allow your opponent to interact with you is up to each player to decide. However, if you think you're somehow allowing maximum interaction with your opponent, you're deluding yourself.

Yes calling RUG a TNN deck because of 2 SB slots is nonsense but this above post is also really stretching.. This thread def. needs more clear headed and calmer posts for the rest of us.

Esper3k

12-17-2013, 12:00 PM

Nobody can convince anyone that anything is or should be fun, I think it would be a dead-end. What we can discuss however is, whether this card is adding anything new and exciting to the format and what it's taking away from the format. This is being argued for pages and not really going anywhere so I won't go there. We can also discuss whether this is a healthy 2-player constructed Magic card. For the second one, I think this card makes sense in a 2-player constructed format as much as ante and dexterity cards.

I agree trying to argue fun / unfun is a dead end, which is why I believe it's a poor criteria to base bannings upon.

As for the rest, I don't think many new arguments will be spawning and we're mostly just going around in circles now.

For me, I think we can see that from the numbers, it's taken two decks (Stoneblade, Deathblade) that were in a slump and brought them back into the limelight. I believe we may also be starting to see a trend where BG/x decks such as Jund, which naturally have good answers to TNN start to see more play again.

To me, the decks that TNN supposedly killed were already seeing less play anyways, so I don't see any problems there either.

TNN is powerful, no doubt. However, I'm actually happy that WoTC has given us a very playable 3 drop creature for Legacy that's a pure combat creature, not a combo creature.

Higgs

12-17-2013, 12:04 PM

I agree trying to argue fun / unfun is a dead end, which is why I believe it's a poor criteria to base bannings upon.

That's a leap of logic there. I'm saying convincing people why something is unfun is not practical. Banning a card because people feel it is unfun is quite doable, and has been apparently done in the past (based on the Sphere example).

Zombie

12-17-2013, 12:05 PM

I agree trying to argue fun / unfun is a dead end, which is why I believe it's a poor criteria to base bannings upon.

As for the rest, I don't think many new arguments will be spawning and we're mostly just going around in circles now.

For me, I think we can see that from the numbers, it's taken two decks (Stoneblade, Deathblade) that were in a slump and brought them back into the limelight. I believe we may also be starting to see a trend where BG/x decks such as Jund, which naturally have good answers to TNN start to see more play again.

To me, the decks that TNN supposedly killed were already seeing less play anyways, so I don't see any problems there either.

TNN is powerful, no doubt. However, I'm actually happy that WoTC has given us a very playable 3 drop creature for Legacy that's a pure combat creature, not a combo creature.

TNN doesn't do combat. It's a clock and a planeswalker assassination device. Could as well read "{T}: TNN deals damage equal to it's power to target player or Planeswalker). Play this ability only as a sorcery." and not much would be different. It doesn't swing in the red zone as far as most cards are concerned.

Esper3k

12-17-2013, 12:09 PM

It's about how the card is strong enough to see widespread play and just makes the games it is in less fun, and some matches an outright farce. It doesn't add anything interesting to the format.

Ahh, the "unfun" argument. See, the discussion with Higgs on why I (and many others) believe that's a poor criteria for banning. It's fine to think a card isn't fun. It's not ok to ban it for that reason.

Overly dominating the format or being too powerful are reasons for a banning.

If I wanted to kill TNN, I'd have to basically kill my own deck or splash two colours for a narrow hate card that isn't worth it against most anything else. It's a world of difference from being able to play targeted removal.

Unthinking baffoons, huh?

Esper3k

12-17-2013, 12:17 PM

That's a leap of logic there. I'm saying convincing people why something is unfun is not practical. Banning a card because people feel it is unfun is quite doable, and has been apparently done in the past (based on the Sphere example).

Again, if you read the quoted text from Forsythe, he makes no mention of fun for Trinisphere's restriction in Vintage. The quoted text says it's "ridiculous", not unfun. As others have stated, the reason Trinisphere is ridiculously powerful in Vintage is because you have decks that can play 5 Black Lotuses and easily generate 3+ mana on T1 in a format that's dominated by 0 and 1 drops.

I don't think it's a far stretch to ask someone to justify to me their reasons for wanting to ban someone. If someone says a card is oppressing the format, I'll ask them to give me numbers to prove it. If someone says something is too powerful, I'll ask them to show me. If someone says it's "unfun", I'll say convince me why it's to such a degree that it requires a banning, especially over other generally accepted more "unfun" cards.

TNN doesn't do combat. It's a clock and a planeswalker assassination device. Could as well read "{T}: TNN deals damage equal to it's power to target player or Planeswalker). Play this ability only as a sorcery." and not much would be different. It doesn't swing in the red zone as far as most cards are concerned.

It's a 7 turn clock and why do we care that it can beat up Planeswalkers?

For Umezawa's Jitte, the card that most people agree is what makes TNN most powerful, it dealing combat damage most certainly matters.

It's a combat creature because it does only what every creature does - it only attacks or it blocks (of course, it does them both very well), ie combat.

Tormod

12-17-2013, 12:25 PM

In all my testing and playing events over the last month True-Name has proven to be a fine card and nothing worthy of panic. But that's me, I've actually played with and against the card.

I'm really wondering if anyone who actually has strong opinions against it has actually played with the card. Because it seems that they havent.

A lot of Esper's responses echo my thoughts but I don't have the effort to voice them. It may come across that Esper isn't reading their responses but it also comes across that there is this vocal minority hasn't even tested or played with the card that are throwing around the words ban, broken, format warping, unfun...

How do you argue with people who have made their mind up about a card when they haven't even played with or against it?

Their arguments aren't based on facts, just some nonsense paranoia.

Arsenal

12-17-2013, 12:46 PM

Canadian is not a dedicated TNN deck. If any pack TNN, they typically do it in the side, not the main.

According to thecouncil, the top 5 decks are Sneak Attack, Shardless BUG, Blade Control, Deathblade, and Patriot. RUG Delver is not top 5 currently.

Scott

12-17-2013, 02:13 PM

About statements regarding TNN taking away the combat step, a part of Magic "wholly devoted to interaction of players by means of creatures":

Consider the name of the game. Magic. Implying, you know, spells, sorcery, exciting Gandalf stuff. There is much more to this game than simple creatures bashing each other's brains in (or out, as the case may be). Granted, combat is indeed a major part of the Magic experience, but so are the main phases, upkeep, and end phases, in which combat is a non-component and spells are the way battle is fought. What TNN does to the combat step, Chalice of the Void does to the rest of the turn. What have you to say about things like Silence, Orim's Chant, counters, discard, Trinisphere, etc.? These take away a part of Magic solely devoted to players casting spells and "interacting" with each other. :rolleyes:

You can agree that there are different degrees of interactivity though, right? TNN can be interacted with on the stack and with moderately good non-targeted removal like edicts and sweepers. It's a creature permanent that also operates with near-impunity through combat. Your examples of CotV and Trinisphere can be interacted with on the stack, with removal including targeted removal, they don't take part in a phase in which it's untouchable, and they have to fit into a deck built around them. Silence, Orim's Chant, counters, and discard don't stick around and can be fully interacted with at the only time in which they're active. Meanwhile, TNN can be slotted in most anywhere without forcing a deckbuilder to make concessions for its abilities, usually reduces the combat phase to a spectator sport, is in blue somehow, and presents a much more mindless experience than simply stopping an opponent from casting spells for a turn, making their spells cost more, removing a card from their hand, etc.

In all my testing and playing events over the last month True-Name has proven to be a fine card and nothing worthy of panic. But that's me, I've actually played with and against the card.

I'm really wondering if anyone who actually has strong opinions against it has actually played with the card. Because it seems that they havent.

A lot of Esper's responses echo my thoughts but I don't have the effort to voice them. It may come across that Esper isn't reading their responses but it also comes across that there is this vocal minority hasn't even tested or played with the card that are throwing around the words ban, broken, format warping, unfun...

How do you argue with people who have made their mind up about a card when they haven't even played with or against it?

Their arguments aren't based on facts, just some nonsense paranoia.

You've posted the claim a few times that people who don't like TNN haven't played in Legacy games involving it. Is this based on facts?

Carsten Kotter wrote similar things in his article and he's certainly experienced.

*Whoever gives me a civil response gets a high five.*

Tormod

12-17-2013, 02:25 PM

You've posted the claim a few times that people who don't like TNN haven't played in Legacy games involving it. Is this based on facts?

Carsten Kotter wrote similar things in his article and he's certainly experienced.

*Whoever gives me a civil response gets a high five.*

The vocal minority of this thread against TNN hasn't refuted the absence of play testing, and they are welcome to do so.

Carsten wrote similar things a month ago to appeal to his audience but clearly his conclusion was that True-Name Nemesis isn't worthy of a ban.

Do I get a high five?

Arsenal

12-17-2013, 02:35 PM

Tormod, I've been on UW Stoneblade (pre-TNN and post-TNN) and have tested extensively against all kinds of decks. I can provide dated posts from the Blade Control thread and the Tourney results thread if you'd like verification.

Esper3k

12-17-2013, 02:38 PM

You can agree that there are different degrees of interactivity though, right? TNN can be interacted with on the stack and with moderately good non-targeted removal like edicts and sweepers. It's a creature permanent that also operates with near-impunity through combat. Your examples of CotV and Trinisphere can be interacted with on the stack, with removal including targeted removal, they don't take part in a phase in which it's untouchable, and they have to fit into a deck built around them. Silence, Orim's Chant, counters, and discard don't stick around and can be fully interacted with at the only time in which they're active. Meanwhile, TNN can be slotted in most anywhere without forcing a deckbuilder to make concessions for its abilities, usually reduces the combat phase to a spectator sport, is in blue somehow, and presents a much more mindless experience than simply stopping an opponent from casting spells for a turn, making their spells cost more, removing a card from their hand, etc.

Certainly there are different degrees of interactivity. Chalice/Sphere/Trinisphere effects affect interactivity by making certain spells harder to play or unplayable (due to not having enough mana to cast them). Removal that affects them is already of a much smaller subset of played cards that affect creatures. Again, being a noncreature permanent already means they ignore the combat step.

While TNN is a better fit in most Legacy decks, that's in part because creatures in general are easier to play in most decks, similar to how easy it is to fit a Tarmogoyf into most green decks if you want to. Even with how powerful TNN is, it still sees more play as a 1-3 of than as a 4-of in decks that play it, so it's hardly (currently) an auto-include for blue decks.

You've posted the claim a few times that people who don't like TNN haven't played in Legacy games involving it. Is this based on facts?

Carsten Kotter wrote similar things in his article and he's certainly experienced.

*Whoever gives me a civil response gets a high five.*

While Carsten Kotter certainly said similar things in his article, he also was not advocating a ban on TNN either, specifically stating that he believes it is not broken in the traditional sense of the word.

Scott

12-17-2013, 02:46 PM

The vocal minority of this thread against TNN hasn't refuted the absence of play testing, and they are welcome to do so.

Carsten wrote similar things a month ago to appeal to his audience but clearly his conclusion was that True-Name Nemesis isn't worthy of a ban.

Do I get a high five?

His full quote for reference:

So does True-Name Nemesis need the banhammer treatment? I don't think it does; however, I'd much enjoy seeing it happen. Yes, it's going to further limit what you can do in the format and will make blue an even more dominant color than it already is, but it won't be able to actually dominate the format itself. There are enough decks out there that can go over the top of it or ignore most of its special talents to make sure of that. There are also enough answers out there to build decks that will successfully deal with it for those willing to move in that direction.

What True-Name Nemesis does however is to force a massive shift in the Legacy metagame, one that goes in a direction most players won't be too happy with. There will be more blue, more combo, and hard control; there will be fewer midrange decks, and the games between them will include significantly more one-sided blowouts. In short, the format will be worse but probably still by far the most diverse and skill-testing one there is.

Basically, he echoes what most (from what I've seen, not the minority that you say) Legacy players think: In the way that the ban list is usually used, against format domination and such, it wouldn't get banned, but they dislike the card and what it may do to the format, and wouldn't be unhappy if it got banned.

And yes! You pass--the underhandedness of "to appeal to his audience" keeps you from a unanimous vote--but you've earned it.

EDIT: Redemption for Esper3k and high fives to him/her too.

http://magiccards.info/scans/en/dka/92.jpg

bjholmes3

12-17-2013, 02:49 PM

That flavor text describes this thread incredibly well.

Latest Metagame Analysis (12/17/13 @ 2:00 pm UTC)
Info taken from The Council

Sneak Attack, 9 tops, 0 copies of TNN
BUG Control, 9 tops, 1 copy of TNN
Deathblade, 8 tops, 30 copies of TNN
Patriot, 7 tops, 18 copies of TNN
Blade Control, 7 tops, 18 copies of TNN
Death & Taxes, 6 tops, 0 copies of TNN
Team America, 5 tops, 0 copies of TNN
Nic Fit, 5 tops, 0 copies of TNN

With recent activity, TNN has seen a marked increase in play.

Admiral_Arzar

12-17-2013, 02:56 PM

The vocal minority of this thread against TNN hasn't refuted the absence of play testing, and they are welcome to do so.

According to the poll results, 45% want a ban. I wouldn't really call that a "vocal minority" in the way that phrase is usually applied.

lordofthepit

12-17-2013, 03:00 PM

According to the poll results, 45% want a ban. I wouldn't really call that a "vocal minority" in the way that phrase is usually applied.

Keep in mind that there is a significant proportion of posters (like myself) who wouldn't mind if TNN disappeared, but don't want it banned until we've had more time to see the long-term effect that it has on the format.

I think TNN is actively bad for the format, but I'm not advocating for a ban right now.

Admiral_Arzar

12-17-2013, 03:05 PM

Keep in mind that there is a significant proportion of posters (like myself) who wouldn't mind if TNN disappeared, but don't want it banned until we've had more time to see the long-term effect that it has on the format.

I think TNN is actively bad for the format, but I'm not advocating for a ban right now.

This is actually my position as well, although I voted "yes" because I would like to see the card banned eventually...not immediately though, this ain't Memory Jar.

Quasim0ff

12-17-2013, 03:51 PM

This is actually my position as well, although I voted "yes" because I would like to see the card banned eventually...not immediately though, this ain't Memory Jar.

I would much rather have memory jar in the format *wink* *wink*.

ESG

12-17-2013, 05:17 PM

Yeah again you can't really compare the unfun of a 3/1 pro-you creature to the unfun of never being able to play a spell for a game of Magic that lasts 5+ turns.

As an occasional Vintage MUD player I can say with some certainty that turn 1 Trinisphere almost feels like an autowin unless they are playing the mirror or Dredge. I almost feel bad when it sticks because it certainly doesn't seem like fun for the other person.

A lot of the "unfun" criticisms mirror those that were expressed about Trinisphere. Power level is obviously a different metric. I have also seen people playing TNN grumble or apologize when they drop it into play or say something to the effect of, "This is so dumb." This is similar to your niggling of unpleasant feelings when you drop a Trinisphere and lock your opponent out. I've never heard anyone apologize for blasting someone with a lethal Tendrils on Turn 1 or playing a Turn 1 Show and Tell or playing a Turn 1 Blood Moon, even though these plays all effectively made those games into Solitaire. People actually find True-Name Nemesis more disagreeable and more unfun than those scenarios, which is why they make an in-game apology like that.

Where did the quote on the banning mention fun?

Posting it again and bolding it for you, Esper3k.

The official explanation from Aaron Forsythe in 2005:
"Trinisphere is a nasty card, no bones about it. It does ridiculous things in Vintage, especially combined with Mishra's Workshop. As I've said in a previous column, we almost restricted it before it was even released.

Now that it has been floating around for a while, the Vintage crowd understands that the card does good things for the format, and bad things to the format. While it does serve a role of keeping combo decks in check, it also randomly destroys people on turn one, with little recourse other than Force of Will. And those games end up labeled with that heinous word—unfun. Not just “I lost” unfun, but “Why did I even come here to play?” unfun. The power level of the card is no jokes either, which is a big reason why I don't feel bad about its restriction.

Vintage, like the other formats with large card pools, always runs the risk of becoming non-interactive, meaning the games are little more than both players “goldfishing” to see who can win first."

He is citing two reasons for the card's banning: "Unfun" to play against and power level. One of these is widely regarded to apply to True-Name Nemesis. Power level is the issue that people are more divided on, with some feeling that the card is overpowered and others feeling it is not overpowered.

:data:

With recent activity, TNN has seen a marked increase in play.

This is an example of format warping, the beginnings of format dominance. It's also important to note that True-Name Nemesis has been in every champion's list from each major U.S. tourney since GP D.C. except for the SCG Invitational, which was won by combo (Omni-Tell), beating a TNN deck in the finals, and SCG Providence, which was won by combo (Sneak and Show), beating a TNN deck in the finals.

lordofthepit

12-17-2013, 05:45 PM

It's also important to note that True-Name Nemesis has been in every champion's list from each major U.S. tourney since GP D.C. except for the SCG Invitational, which was won by combo (Omni-Tell), beating a TNN deck in the finals, and SCG Providence, which was won by combo (Sneak and Show), beating a TNN deck in the finals.

Actually, the Invitational was won by a Standard deck beating another Standard deck in the finals, which actually strengthens your argument. I would look up which Standard decks were involved, except those words don't mean anything to me and don't really affect your argument.

Ziveeman

12-17-2013, 05:53 PM

This is an example of format warping, the beginnings of format dominance. It's also important to note that True-Name Nemesis has been in every champion's list from each major U.S. tourney since GP D.C. except for the SCG Invitational, which was won by combo (Omni-Tell), beating a TNN deck in the finals, and SCG Providence, which was won by combo (Sneak and Show), beating a TNN deck in the finals.

It was also in the SCG Dallas-winning list (UW Stoneblade), beating combo (ANT). But the Top 8 of the Invitational actually played Standard, so Omnitell didn't actually beat a TNN deck in the finals.

Dice_Box

12-17-2013, 06:03 PM

Keep in mind that there is a significant proportion of posters (like myself) who wouldn't mind if TNN disappeared, but don't want it banned until we've had more time to see the long-term effect that it has on the format.

I think TNN is actively bad for the format, but I'm not advocating for a ban right now.
I am sure there are people like myself who have not voted too while having a strong opinion. Personally, I want the card gone, gone but not banned. Erated to give protection from a Commander I like.

I will not vote because yes I want the card gone, but I am fearful of the precedent banning it will do. Still I hate the very precedent this card sets too.

Koby

12-17-2013, 06:05 PM

The issue is exacerbated beyond whether TNN is good or not. The best aggro color is now blue, which also happens to run Force of Will in almost all (>95%?) of variations. This makes the blue aggro deck (Delver, TNN, Daze, etc) better at large against the metagame than non-blue decks. This reduces the variety of decks viable and polarizes the format into "decks that have the best chance fighting TNN fairly, and decks that ignore TNN".

This is clearly not desirable for any given format. Cards that limit meaningful deck choices is a justifiable reason to ban said cards.

Arsenal

12-17-2013, 06:08 PM

Koby

12-17-2013, 06:11 PM

Koby, prepare to be told how wrong you are...

Running TNN is a way to fight TNN fairly. As we can clearly see from GP DC coverage, the best way to beat TNN is to have one more copy of the card in play than your opponent.

Julian23

12-17-2013, 06:12 PM

lordofthepit

12-17-2013, 06:25 PM

I just wish we would see something als healthy as Zoo come back. While it was originally pushed out of the format by Maverick (which also is great against Merfolk, one of Zoo's best matchups), there's really not that much of a point in playing it anyways.

I had been playing Zoo for a while this year. Ever since TNN became legal, I have not touched it.

Esper3k

12-17-2013, 06:52 PM

A lot of the "unfun" criticisms mirror those that were expressed about Trinisphere. Power level is obviously a different metric. I have also seen people playing TNN grumble or apologize when they drop it into play or say something to the effect of, "This is so dumb." This is similar to your niggling of unpleasant feelings when you drop a Trinisphere and lock your opponent out. I've never heard anyone apologize for blasting someone with a lethal Tendrils on Turn 1 or playing a Turn 1 Show and Tell or playing a Turn 1 Blood Moon, even though these plays all effectively made those games into Solitaire. People actually find True-Name Nemesis more disagreeable and more unfun than those scenarios, which is why they make an in-game apology like that.

Posting it again and bolding it for you, Esper3k.

The official explanation from Aaron Forsythe in 2005:
"Trinisphere is a nasty card, no bones about it. It does ridiculous things in Vintage, especially combined with Mishra's Workshop. As I've said in a previous column, we almost restricted it before it was even released.

Now that it has been floating around for a while, the Vintage crowd understands that the card does good things for the format, and bad things to the format. While it does serve a role of keeping combo decks in check, it also randomly destroys people on turn one, with little recourse other than Force of Will. And those games end up labeled with that heinous word—unfun. Not just “I lost” unfun, but “Why did I even come here to play?” unfun. The power level of the card is no jokes either, which is a big reason why I don't feel bad about its restriction.

Vintage, like the other formats with large card pools, always runs the risk of becoming non-interactive, meaning the games are little more than both players “goldfishing” to see who can win first."

He is citing two reasons for the card's banning: "Unfun" to play against and power level. One of these is widely regarded to apply to True-Name Nemesis. Power level is the issue that people are more divided on, with some feeling that the card is overpowered and others feeling it is not overpowered.

Fair enough, I apologize for missing it the first time.

While the unfun argument is used, I would still argue that the circumstances of TNN in Legacy are significantly different from Trinispheres in Vintage. I also still believe the "unfun" argument is extremely subjective and best not used, which modern banning philosophy seems to tend to stay away from.

Barook

12-17-2013, 07:17 PM

I also still believe the "unfun" argument is extremely subjective and best not used, which modern banning philosophy seems to tend to stay away from.
Sure, fun and " unfun" are subjective, but alot of people feel pretty bad about TNN, otherwise this thread wouldn't be already 35 pages long.

Sure, losing against Storm combo T1 or getting a hard-lock by a T1 Blood Moon kinda sucks, but the Storm thing doesn't happen often enough to be considered "unfun" by a majority of players and BM is a calculated risk of running a greedy manabase.

Playing a fair deck and then getting fucked over by a TNN is far more likely than said scenarios. Power-level arguments aside, the helplessness of losing against a TNN might be comparable to other "unfun" situations were you can't do jackshit.

Megadeus

12-17-2013, 07:43 PM

Yeah I havent played Zoo since TNN got printed either. Before hand I actually was really enjoying Big Zoo though. Now? I think it just wouldnt be that good in the meta

Zombie

12-17-2013, 07:48 PM

I am sure there are people like myself who have not voted too while having a strong opinion. Personally, I want the card gone, gone but not banned. Erated to give protection from a Commander I like.

I will not vote because yes I want the card gone, but I am fearful of the precedent banning it will do. Still I hate the very precedent this card sets too.

Or you could just ban the damn card instead of dancing around the issue. The errata would be as good as banning the POS anyway, just a less clean way that doesn't offend people's precious competitive ptw player self-images.

Arsenal

12-17-2013, 07:58 PM

Running TNN is a way to fight TNN fairly. As we can clearly see from GP DC coverage, the best way to beat TNN is to have one more copy of the card in play than your opponent.

I apologize for being unclear. I was pointing out that we said essentially the same thing; ignore TNN completely or gameplan around/with TNN. When I said it, I was lambasted for it. Just wanted to give you a heads up as you basically echoed my earlier sentiment.

Finn

12-17-2013, 08:13 PM

This might be a dumb question, but exactly which decks are being forced out of the meta from TNN right now? I count, let's see, Jund. And that's it.

Arsenal

12-17-2013, 08:23 PM

This might be a dumb question, but exactly which decks are being forced out of the meta from TNN right now? I count, let's see, Jund. And that's it.

Although it may change from now until Jan. 1st, RUG Delver seems to have been pushed out of the meta (top tier, not the entire game of Magic) (http://www.thecouncil.es/tcdecks/tierdecks.php?anio=2013&mes=13&format=Legacy).

If you look at the previous 11 months, you'll find RUG Delver firmly planted at the top, but that changed beginning this month. It even tries to keep pace with TNN decks by running their own TNN in the SB, but I don't think that's a solid long term strategy (but does illustrate how TNN is strong arming it's way into decks).

And if you read the RUG Delver thread, I think it was anticipated (correctly) by many that TNN would be one of the ways RUG Delver just loses now to previously even-positive fair matchups (yes, this is even with running MOAR Ancient Grudge, REBs, etc).

Zombie

12-17-2013, 08:33 PM

I'm somewhat surprised that Shardless seems to still be a deck.

EDIT: Going through the decklists, there's a pretty sharp uptick on sideboarded sweepers - specifically Golgari Charms and Toxic Deluges - but apart from that the decks look oddly normal, often only running 2-of Lilianas. One weirdo-build runs a singleton Sword of Fire and Ice maindeck. There's also a few TNN builds.

I guess they count on just Decaying opposing equipment because they have a bigger-than-TNN backswing, otherwise, dunno.

saspook

12-17-2013, 09:06 PM

Deadpool09

12-17-2013, 09:58 PM

Although it may change from now until Jan. 1st, RUG Delver seems to have been pushed out of the meta (top tier, not the entire game of Magic) (http://www.thecouncil.es/tcdecks/tierdecks.php?anio=2013&mes=13&format=Legacy).

If you look at the previous 11 months, you'll find RUG Delver firmly planted at the top, but that changed beginning this month. It even tries to keep pace with TNN decks by running their own TNN in the SB, but I don't think that's a solid long term strategy (but does illustrate how TNN is strong arming it's way into decks).

And if you read the RUG Delver thread, I think it was anticipated (correctly) by many that TNN would be one of the ways RUG Delver just loses now to previously even-positive fair matchups (yes, this is even with running MOAR Ancient Grudge, REBs, etc).

You are so determined to hate tnn that youre basically saying its not ok if one of the most dominating decks in the history of the format (rug) got dethroned. Btw, rug will always be included in the decks to beat as long as the concept of tempo exist. So aside from Jund, what else did tnn obliterated completely? it feels like the haters here are a bunch of terrorist fear mongering the apocalypse that is tnn. STOP SELLING THE FORMAT SHORT. It will stabilize. It is not mental misstep. Jeezus.

Arsenal

12-17-2013, 09:59 PM

How do you account for 3 of the top eight decklists in Las Vegas being RUG?

I linked to thecouncil's monthly data, which shows what's happening across the entire format, not just a single tourney. Also, a TNN deck won that SCG Legacy Open (and all 3 of those RUG Delver lists sided TNN).

Deadpool09, calm down kiddo. I didn't give my personal opinion as to whether RUG Delver dropping significantly was good or bad, I simply answered Finn's question using data from thecouncil.com. What the hell man?

Esper3k

12-17-2013, 10:11 PM

Sure, fun and " unfun" are subjective, but alot of people feel pretty bad about TNN, otherwise this thread wouldn't be already 35 pages long.

Sure, losing against Storm combo T1 or getting a hard-lock by a T1 Blood Moon kinda sucks, but the Storm thing doesn't happen often enough to be considered "unfun" by a majority of players and BM is a calculated risk of running a greedy manabase.

Playing a fair deck and then getting fucked over by a TNN is far more likely than said scenarios. Power-level arguments aside, the helplessness of losing against a TNN might be comparable to other "unfun" situations were you can't do jackshit.

Sure, for some people, having to deal with a resolved TNN isn't very fun, but I don't see much of a difference between that or facing combo (when you're not running countermagic) or get locked out by CounterTop. I can definitely see the comparison with situations where you're locked out, but that doesn't mean it warrants a ban.

I'm somewhat surprised that Shardless seems to still be a deck.

EDIT: Going through the decklists, there's a pretty sharp uptick on sideboarded sweepers - specifically Golgari Charms and Toxic Deluges - but apart from that the decks look oddly normal, often only running 2-of Lilianas. One weirdo-build runs a singleton Sword of Fire and Ice maindeck. There's also a few TNN builds.

I guess they count on just Decaying opposing equipment because they have a bigger-than-TNN backswing, otherwise, dunno.

It actually doesn't surprise me that much. GB really has the best answers right now to a resolved TNN on top of being able to deal with SFM through AD and hand disruption.

You are so determined to hate tnn that youre basically saying its not ok if one of the most dominating decks in the history of the format (rug) got dethroned. Btw, rug will always be included in the decks to beat as long as the concept of tempo exist. So aside from Jund, what else did tnn obliterated completely? it feels like the haters here are a bunch of terrorist fear mongering the apocalypse that is tnn. STOP SELLING THE FORMAT SHORT. It will stabilize. It is not mental misstep. Jeezus.

Jund made a pretty big showing at the Invitational this weekend too. Even so, Jund was on the decline well before TNN was printed, most likely due to the rise in popularity of Sneaky Show.

I linked to thecouncil's monthly data, which shows what's happening across the entire format, not just a single tourney. Also, a TNN deck won that SCG Legacy Open.

Deadpool09, calm down kiddo. I didn't give my personal opinion as to whether RUG Delver dropping significantly was good or bad, I simply answered Finn's question using data from thecouncil.com. What the hell man?

Again, as others have pointed out, I don't really how you can call a deck that played 2 TNN in the main and one in the board really a "TNN deck". Wilson's deck is a Delver deck first and foremost.

Esper3k

12-17-2013, 10:14 PM

How do you account for 3 of the top eight decklists in Las Vegas being RUG?

The data from TCDecks hasn't been updated yet for the Vegas Open results from what I can see. I would expect RUG and Jund to probably move up in the standings after their T8's.

Arsenal

12-17-2013, 10:16 PM

Machahiko

12-17-2013, 10:18 PM

I just wish we would see something als healthy as Zoo come back. While it was originally pushed out of the format by Maverick (which also is great against Merfolk, one of Zoo's best matchups), there's really not that much of a point in playing it anyways.

Delver of Secrets killed Zoo. Why play 3/3 guy that can be punished by wastelands when you can play 3/2 flying guy with no drawbacks? Wild Nacatl also forces you to play Naya colors, while Delver can be paired up with anything thanks to being blue and having brainstorm and all the other cantrips. : )

It's not like I'm bitter or anything...

Scott

12-17-2013, 10:34 PM

You are so determined to hate tnn that youre basically saying its not ok if one of the most dominating decks in the history of the format (rug) got dethroned. Btw, rug will always be included in the decks to beat as long as the concept of tempo exist. So aside from Jund, what else did tnn obliterated completely? it feels like the haters here are a bunch of terrorist fear mongering the apocalypse that is tnn. STOP SELLING THE FORMAT SHORT. It will stabilize. It is not mental misstep. Jeezus.

It's frustrating to see people who don't like TNN being labeled as people who are bitter that their deck is less well-positioned, people who never want to see decks rise and fall in general, or both. My favorite deck has always been the TNN-boosted Mono Black, I love seeing RUG Delver get beaten, I think that no deck is entitled to their tier status, and I still think that TNN is unhealthy.

You're taking a silly tack. It would be like me telling you that you sold the format short for not thinking the format could stabilize after Mental Misstep, or telling you to play Yugioh because you obviously like mindless games like TNN games. Both are unfair and unproductive.

It's not just about decks being pushed out. Some Tier 2 decks/approaches stand no chance in matchups they should, a few Tier 1 decks/color have been pushed ever higher at the top, and there's homogenization. I see that Brainstorm was in 52% of decks in 2011, 62% in 2012, and 70% in the last two months.

A lot of people welcome decks going up or down but don't welcome the format adjusting in an unhealthy way to something seen as bullshit.

Esper3k

12-17-2013, 10:39 PM

So if a deck doesn't run a full playset of a card, you disregard the impact of that card? It isn't "TNN enough" for you? I give you data how the penetration of TNN is very real, but my data isn't good enough because players opted not to run a playset of TNN?

There are many decks that don't run a playset of a card, yet those decks are clearly associated with that card. ANT doesn't run a playset of Ad Nauseam or Tendrils. Miracles doesn't run a playset of Terminus or Entreat. Jund doesn't run a playset of BBE.

Sure we're seeing more TNNs getting played, as is expected whenever any powerful card enters the format. Whether it's dominating or not is up for debate. For some, such as myself, the numbers do not warrant a concern.

Decks are often named after the signature card or mechanic of the deck. AnT could also very correctly be labelled a Storm deck. Miracles does tend to run more than 4 Miracles and often does run 4 Terminus between the sideboard and main. Miracles could also be correctly labelled as a CounterTop deck.

However, taking a UWR Delver deck, slapping 2 TNN into the main and 1 in the board in place of the Geists... and now suddenly it's a TNN deck? The main gameplan of killing your opponent with Delver while keeping them off balance still hasn't changed. The TNN is there for when your primary plan goes wrong. It's like calling Max Brown's OmniTell deck a "Jace deck" because it had 2 JTMS in it.

Mislabelling decks to try and make TNN look more menacing doesn't add anything to the discussion.

Arsenal

12-17-2013, 10:49 PM

EpicLevelCommoner

12-17-2013, 11:10 PM

I believe a more accurate term to use to describe a ban-worthy card is "polarizing": if a card is so powerful that the format forces you to build and play with it or build and play against it, completely preventing building and playing around it, then it should be banned. Skullclamp and Mental Misstep are examples of polarizing cards.

True-Name Nemesis is nowhere close to that, seeing how the format hasn't really changed outside of TNN being dominant, just like Goyf was the undisputed king of every format it was legal in pre-Green Sun's Zenith.

Esper3k

12-17-2013, 11:13 PM

TNN isn't a card you build an entire deck around. You simply slap it into existing strategies/decks and watch them work exponentially better than before. You can continue thinking Blade Control, Patriot, Bant and Deathblade are just Delver/SFM/DRS/GSZ decks, but they are all just trying their best to support TNN (mana ramping him with DRS/Noble, beating opposing TNN with SFM-Equipment, etc).

Also, a card doesn't have to be the focal point in order to be unhealthy. Mental Misstep was added to existing strategies/decks and made them all exponentially better than before. But you should be fine with that because, I mean, they weren't labelled "Mental Misstep decks", right?

I would actually say that the Reid Duke Bant deck and the Blade Control decks are the closest we currently have to dedicated TNN decks.

It's when you try and classify decks like UWR Delver and RUG as TNN decks to fit your anti-TNN agenda is what I take issue with.

True, a card doesn't have to be the focal point of a deck to warrant a ban. Let me know when the numbers of TNNs being played reaches Mental Misstep levels. And of course, you think TNN is on the same power level as Mental Misstep is, right?

Arsenal

12-17-2013, 11:16 PM

Barook

12-17-2013, 11:19 PM

It's not just about decks being pushed out. Some Tier 2 decks/approaches stand no chance in matchups they should, a few Tier 1 decks/color have been pushed ever higher at the top, and there's homogenization. I see that Brainstorm was in 52% of decks in 2011, 62% in 2012, and 70% in the last two months.
Now the interesting question is whether or not TNN is the reason for the BS increase due to more blue decks to play TNN + more combo to ignore TNN.

But 70% is alot. It would be interesting to know how much % of the field a card would have to take to be considered ban-worthy, since this was the argument for Mental Missstep that basically every deck had to run a full playset.

Esper3k

12-17-2013, 11:30 PM

No, not on the same power level. It's always been the "unfun" factor for me.

Also, why is Blade Control a dedicated TNN deck, but Patriot isn't? Both decks run SFM-Equipment to trump opposing TNNs, Blade Control runs 1-2 maindeck sweepers as a concession to the TNN mirror, and the SCG Dallas list even went so far to run a maindeck Celestial Flare to fight TNN. I'm curious why you think running 3 maindeck TNN in Blade Control = TNN deck, but running 2 maindeck TNN in Patriot = not a TNN deck.

I said closest thing we have to a dedicated TNN deck. I'm not certain we have actually seen one truly built around it yet.

It all comes down the primary game plan of the deck. Within Stoneblade decks, I would say only the Esper / Deathblade builds these days have a primary plan of controlling the board until you can suit up your TNN and win off the back of it. I would actually call Thomason's UW list a Jace deck more than anything else. The main plan of that deck is to stall and leverage the power of Jace. Sure, it can go with the beat-them-to-death-with-TNN/Batterskull plan, but those pieces are there mainly to protect Jace.

Tempo / Delver decks plan on dropping a quick threat and then disrupting you while their threat kills you. TNN in those decks, as can be seen by their generally low maindeck numbers or being relegated to the sideboard, is their backup plan.

Esper3k

12-18-2013, 12:00 AM

Speaking of experienced players writing about TNN, here's one saying why people shouldn't freak out yet:

http://www.channelfireball.com/articles/legacy-weapon-define-stagnant/

Zombie

12-18-2013, 01:04 AM

Speaking of experienced players writing about TNN, here's one saying why people shouldn't freak out yet:

http://www.channelfireball.com/articles/legacy-weapon-define-stagnant/

And still misses that there have been a crapton of actually interesting and powerful cards in Commander sets. Stuff that isn't uninteractive, boring crap.

http://gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?multiverseid=233181&type=cardhttp://gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?multiverseid=376260&type=cardhttp://gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?multiverseid=270733&type=card
http://gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?multiverseid=376559&type=cardhttp://gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?multiverseid=228255&type=card

When I look at these, I see interesting cards that allow for fun things.

When I see this I see a shit that doesn't make the game more fun, but more boring:
http://gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?multiverseid=376562&type=card

Teluin

12-18-2013, 01:37 AM

Ignoring SCGs and other tournaments, why not discuss what you've noticed from your LGS tournaments?

Here's what I've noticed:

- Before TNN, we would get an average of 15 players on Monday nights. In the last month, that has dropped to 11 (and thus 3 rounds instead of 4).

- There are a couple of people who have consistently played a TNN deck every Monday since the card came out. Prior to TNN, a friend of mine had come in first 3-4 times in the last half year. He's a decent player, but definitely did not have the same results as he does now - he has placed 1st, 1st, 2nd, and 4th in the last 4 tournaments. He is the only person I know who likes the card - and that is because he enjoys winning.

- Our diverse meta has shrunk - this is because TNN is in a lot of decks and a due to a smaller attendance.

Quite frankly, I think Nemesis is a shining example of a badly designed card. Based on observations at my LGS, I think it should be banned for various reasons including the decline of meta diversity, attendance, and the overall fun factor. Anyone who claims Nemesis is interactive is lying. If this card was designed for multi-player games, then it has no business being in a 1v1 format - just like ante cards were designed for ante games and thus are not allowed in Legacy.

ESG

12-18-2013, 01:40 AM

Actually, the Invitational was won by a Standard deck beating another Standard deck in the finals, which actually strengthens your argument.

Yeah, the SCG Invitational is a special case. What I meant is that the first-place Legacy deck was Omni-Tell; the second-place Legacy deck was Merfolk maxed out on Nemeses.

You are so determined to hate tnn that youre basically saying its not ok if one of the most dominating decks in the history of the format (rug) got dethroned. Btw, rug will always be included in the decks to beat as long as the concept of tempo exist. So aside from Jund, what else did tnn obliterated completely? it feels like the haters here are a bunch of terrorist fear mongering the apocalypse that is tnn. STOP SELLING THE FORMAT SHORT. It will stabilize. It is not mental misstep. Jeezus.

Maybe you need a history lesson? Let's grab some quotes from the Mental Misstep thread circa August 2011. (The card was banned a month later.)

Now that Misstep is here, people are complaining it is warping the format. It isn't 'warping' anything, folks; it's a product of a lack of creativity. There is a huge influx of new players running brews they see listed on Star City's website or by word of mouth from friends, and those folks just pick those decks up and run with them. Legacy is at an all-time low as it pertains to its 'creative' aspect, which is why you see the same decks like NO Rug, Hive Mind, etc. running the gauntlet week in and week out. I still feel the format is fine, though. There are lots of different archetypes winning each week, which is what makes the format great.

This. People will adjust.

How is the format not healthy. I think we are getting tunnel vision and are just focusing on the SCG events, there are other tournaments.

Anyhow this seems to be an american problem. Everyone likes to join the bus instead of doing something against it ;)

I remain confident that True-Name Nemesis decks will continue to post impressive tournament finishes, just as Mental Misstep proved to be intractable.

I like Caleb, but his latest article spoke about League of Legends the majority of the time, and it didn't exactly stick up for Nemesis. Rather, he opines that all change is good change, from the perspective of a deck builder. Also, this statement is awful, and I couldn't disagree with it more:

"But it's the changes that keep games fresh, whether the pros like it or not. Players at the top have to relearn, temporarily shaking things up and giving new players a chance. Everyone, at all levels, gets to experience that rush of accomplishment over again.

Following this logic, changing the legend rule was good for Magic. Changing it again will also be good for Magic. They could make damage stack again, and that'd be fine too. Not because damage stacking is good or bad for the game, that's mostly irrelevant. A small, arbitrary shift to the game, just to keep people on their toes, has value in itself."

Change for the sake of change, with no reasoning behind it? No thanks.

luckme10

12-18-2013, 02:54 AM

Speaking of experienced players writing about TNN, here's one saying why people shouldn't freak out yet:

http://www.channelfireball.com/articles/legacy-weapon-define-stagnant/

Isn't that the guy that got survival banned? That's like someone telling you that you're home security is good enough, after robbing your house.

lordofthepit

12-18-2013, 03:30 AM

Once again, I'm not advocating banning TNN yet, but the arguments in favor of it have been quite lacking.

Here's why Flash shouldn't be banned: http://www.wizards.com/magic/magazine/events.aspx?x=mtgevent/gpcol07/welcome#5

I don't think TNN approaches the degeneracy of Survival or Mental Misstep, but the other two are more interactive and skill-intensive cards to play with (as well as being much more fun in the case of Survival). Moreover, TNN is already putting up much better results than Mystical Tutor ever did.

Nielsie

12-18-2013, 03:48 AM

Usualy I like Caleb, but that article seems a little bit off. He indeed talked more about League of Legends than about MTG.

What kind of hosers is Wizards going to print to fix this without banning TNN? Maybe something like this in an EDH product, remember it is supposed to work only for multiplayer games but R&D will simply 'forget' to test it in Legacy:
Stupid dumb red dude 1R
Creature something something
3/1
Haste, First strike
Stupid dumb red dude cannot be countered.
As Stupid dumb red dude enters the battlefield, choose a player controlling an island. That player loses the game.

Be sure to waste your underground sea while it's on the stack! See it even got answers!

Tormod

12-18-2013, 04:32 AM

If you want a red fixer card, it wouldn't be to hard.

1R
Sorcery
deals 2 damage to every creature.
damage cannot be prevented.

Barook

12-18-2013, 07:18 AM

Usualy I like Caleb, but that article seems a little bit off. He indeed talked more about League of Legends than about MTG.
The only thing LoL and TNN have in common is that neither are very well-designed.

Those arguments in mind, I don't think the card will damage Legacy significantly.

...

Deadguy ale is one of the few decks that can maindeck Zealous Persecution on top of Liliana
I scratched my head at that part. So TNN is okay because Deadguy Ale can MD Zealous Persecution now? :eyebrow: What kind of argument is that? Deadguy Ale isn't even a real deck at the moment.

Star|Scream

12-18-2013, 07:18 AM

If you want a red fixer card, it wouldn't be to hard.

1R
Sorcery
deals 2 damage to every creature.
damage cannot be prevented.

That's an amazing idea. It seems like this card should already exist!

Nielsie

12-18-2013, 07:38 AM

If you want a red fixer card, it wouldn't be to hard.

1R
Sorcery
deals 2 damage to every creature.
damage cannot be prevented.
Aww come on, red deserves something more juicy than that. If blue can have Brainstorm, Force and now TNN, why can't red have Stupid dumb red dude? My dude would also fix the 2cc cylce :laugh:

Arsenal

12-18-2013, 07:39 AM

I said closest thing we have to a dedicated TNN deck. I'm not certain we have actually seen one truly built around it yet.

It all comes down the primary game plan of the deck. Within Stoneblade decks, I would say only the Esper / Deathblade builds these days have a primary plan of controlling the board until you can suit up your TNN and win off the back of it. I would actually call Thomason's UW list a Jace deck more than anything else. The main plan of that deck is to stall and leverage the power of Jace. Sure, it can go with the beat-them-to-death-with-TNN/Batterskull plan, but those pieces are there mainly to protect Jace.

Tempo / Delver decks plan on dropping a quick threat and then disrupting you while their threat kills you. TNN in those decks, as can be seen by their generally low maindeck numbers or being relegated to the sideboard, is their backup plan.

Esper, as I (and others) have stated, TNN isn't a card you build an entire deck around. You simply throw it in existing decks and watch them do exponentially better than before.

Your argument is since no deck has been constructed solely around TNN, there are no TNN decks. I strongly disagree as it's quite obvious that the decks currently running TNN do so with TNN at the forefront of their minds. They either are looking to mana-ramp into him to land their TNN before the opponent does (Bant and Deathblade) or they're looking to have the best TNN on the table thanks to SFM-Equipment (Stoneblade, Esperblade, Patriot) or both (Bant and Deathblade).

Bed Decks Palyer

12-18-2013, 08:07 AM

Esper, as I (and others) have stated, TNN isn't a card you build an entire deck around. You simply throw it in existing decks and watch them do exponentially better than before.

Your argument is since no deck has been constructed solely around TNN, there are no TNN decks. I strongly disagree as it's quite obvious that the decks currently running TNN do so with TNN at the forefront of their minds. They either are looking to mana-ramp into him to land their TNN before the opponent does (Bant and Deathblade) or they're looking to have the best TNN on the table thanks to SFM-Equipment (Stoneblade, Esperblade, Patriot) or both (Bant and Deathblade).

I'm not sure if I'd call these decks TNN.dec, most of them existed before, it's just that they use now-available fully-blue Tarmogoyf Ascetic. The reason why TNN should be disliked is becasue of its ugly design: it's not a creature, at least not usual. It's like having sorcery that would attack; something not even FUT brought, it's more like from Un-sets, as already someone wrote.

EDIT: Please stop quoting ̶R̶i̶c̶o̶ ̶S̶u̶a̶v̶e̶ Esper3k, he is on my ignore list and I actually have to read 3-4 words of one of his posts everytime I scroll down.

PirateKing

12-18-2013, 08:08 AM

Esper3k

12-18-2013, 09:07 AM

Esper, as I (and others) have stated, TNN isn't a card you build an entire deck around. You simply throw it in existing decks and watch them do exponentially better than before.

Your argument is since no deck has been constructed solely around TNN, there are no TNN decks. I strongly disagree as it's quite obvious that the decks currently running TNN do so with TNN at the forefront of their minds. They either are looking to mana-ramp into him to land their TNN before the opponent does (Bant and Deathblade) or they're looking to have the best TNN on the table thanks to SFM-Equipment (Stoneblade, Esperblade, Patriot) or both (Bant and Deathblade).

And what I'm saying is just because you threw a few into a deck, it doesn't suddenly turn it into a TNN deck like you've been trying to do with UWR Delver and RUG to make TNN look like it's more populous than it is.

For the third time now, I'll say that the closest thing we actually have to a dedicated TNN deck is Reid Duke's Bant list, most Deathblade lists, and most Esper Stoneblade lists. If your primary game plan is to play TNN and suit it up with equipment, it's fine to call that deck a TNN deck. I don't understand why you're trying to argue with me on this point when what you're saying is in agreement with me.

UWR Delver and RUG do not have a primary strategy of riding TNN to victory, thus it is not correct to call them TNN decks. UW/x Miracles sometimes play Vendilion Cliques or Snapcasters, but it's incorrect to call them beatdown decks just because sometimes they can win off of those. The same thing applies here.

Esper3k

12-18-2013, 09:10 AM

I was actually surprised there isn't a flavor of Pyroclasm that traded 1 damage for a can't be prevented clause. Seems totally reasonable for a :1::r: cost as well. Wipe all x/1s regardless of protection or white based damage redirection tricks.

Given that we're starting to get spells like Skullcrack, it wouldn't surprise me to see something like that come up in an upcoming set.

PirateKing

12-18-2013, 09:39 AM

UWR Delver and RUG do not have a primary strategy of riding TNN to victory...

I agree except I've started to see some UWr Delver builds at my LGS that are TNN decks; early Delver, follow with TNN to throw a sword on found with SFM. Red seems to be MD Lightning Bolt with SB REB and Grim Lavamancer. They call it American Delver, and it seems to fit your criteria for a TNN deck.

EDIT: To clarify, they seem to have eschewed the traditional Batterskull/Jitte package for MD swords and have 4 TNN. I haven't had a chance to go through it completely to see what other changes there are. But it is a TNN take on UWR different from popular lists seem elsewhere.

Feaor

12-18-2013, 09:48 AM

I would say to just ignore him, I don't think its particularly relevant or interesting to have discussions on semantics like what exactly is interactive and what does it mean to be an X deck, especially the later as the argument of the people claiming that X deck is not a TNN deck will at some point boil down to a No True Scotsman (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman) argument.

TNN isn't even a build around card, its a goodstuff card that happens to synergize with other goodstuff cards, i.e. Stoneforge Mystic. I would say that any deck that's playing both of these cards is a TNN deck even though its plan isn't exclusively to suit up TNN and smash.

Esper3k

12-18-2013, 10:14 AM

I agree except I've started to see some UWr Delver builds at my LGS that are TNN decks; early Delver, follow with TNN to throw a sword on found with SFM. Red seems to be MD Lightning Bolt with SB REB and Grim Lavamancer. They call it American Delver, and it seems to fit your criteria for a TNN deck.

EDIT: To clarify, they seem to have eschewed the traditional Batterskull/Jitte package for MD swords and have 4 TNN. I haven't had a chance to go through it completely to see what other changes there are. But it is a TNN take on UWR different from popular lists seem elsewhere.

Sure, if your primary game plan is to drop a TNN and ride it to victory, you're a TNN deck. From what you are describing, a UWR deck that plays 4 TNN and tries to control the board until you can play one then suit it up would certainly fit that criteria.

But really, calling RUG Delver a "TNN deck" just because they have 1-2 in the sideboard?

I think if the more correct way to look at the amount a card is being played is looking at the actual numbers of the card showing up in T8's, not how many "TNN decks" there are. As you can see, the number of "TNN decks" can be manipulated by how you classify them, but the copies of a card being played is 1) more difficult to falsify 2) gives you a more accurate picture of how much the card is actually being used.

Arsenal

12-18-2013, 10:22 AM

But really, calling RUG Delver a "TNN deck" just because they have 1-2 in the sideboard?

I don't recall stating RUG Delver was a TNN deck, only that RUG Delver was running TNN in the sideboard (which is a poor long term solution, but that's for a different thread). If I did state that RUG Delver was a TNN deck, I apologize and retract that statement. I do recall stating that Bant, Deathblade, Blade Control (Esper and UW) and Patriot are TNN decks though.

EpicLevelCommoner

12-18-2013, 10:23 AM

I can just see it now: a year from now, True-Name will be on the banlist while Iona and Proggy and Emralulz and Bargainbrand continue to be the most non-interactive cards in the format, effectively costing 2U with a card called Show and Tell.

And as the aspiring new legacy players that some of us try to get into the format sit across from their first opponent and have their face eaten off by any number of those, they'll be scratching their heads wondering why the hell the legacy community pushed to have TNN banned over S&T.

To be fair, I can see the unfun perspective: Protection from a chosen opponent turns off a lot of interaction such as blocking and spot removal. But so does "protection from all colored spells and omnomnom 6", "pay 7 draw 7 Force/Daze", and "sorry, the color of the spell you're trying to cast is not available at this time. please leave a message and we'll get back to you as soon as possible. thank you."

Esper3k

12-18-2013, 10:36 AM

I don't recall stating RUG Delver was a TNN deck, only that RUG Delver was running TNN in the sideboard (which is a poor long term solution, but that's for a different thread). If I did state that RUG Delver was a TNN deck, I apologize and retract that statement. I do recall stating that Bant, Deathblade, Blade Control (Esper and UW) and Patriot are TNN decks though.

I think we're in agreement on the classification of most Bant, Deathblade, Esper Stoneblade as TNN decks.

The main point of contention I think we're talking about here is UW (which I believe is more a Jace deck as the primary plan of that deck is to set up and protect Jace to leverage his card advantage) and UWR Delver (who has the standard tempo deck plan of riding Delver to victory while disrupting you) as TNN decks.

Again, why even bother with classifying a deck as a TNN deck or not? Why not look at the actual numbers of TNNs being played in T8's compared to other cards?

Arsenal

12-18-2013, 10:57 AM

Why not look at the actual numbers of TNNs being played in T8's compared to other cards?

http://www.tcdecks.net/mostplayedcards.php?format=Legacy&mess=12&anio=2013

Because using that metric doesn't make much sense. I've read countless times how people want Show and Tell, Griselbrand, etc banned, but if you're going solely off the numbers, they're not banworthy. Essentially, there are reasons why cards get banned that have nothing to do with numbers.

Esper3k

12-18-2013, 11:06 AM

http://www.tcdecks.net/mostplayedcards.php?format=Legacy&mess=12&anio=2013

Because using that metric doesn't make much sense. I've read countless times how people want Show and Tell, Griselbrand, etc banned, but if you're going solely off the numbers, they're not banworthy.

I would argue that it makes plenty of sense. I don't see how someone can argue that a card is dominating a format if it actually isn't seeing much play compared to other cards. I'm not advocating using numbers as the only criteria, but it should be a large part of it if someone is going to be making any sort of dominating / oppressing the format argument.

To dredge up the Brainstorm argument, the very reason -for- banning it is because it's all over the place. It's also much more playable across multiple deck archetypes than pretty much any other card in Legacy.

Bringing up Show & Tell is a bad example for me since I'm one of those people who don't think it should be banned. Again, I would argue that if it's as dominating as people claim it is, then we'd see more of it. It's certainly a card that any deck playing it wants as a 4-of.

Part of my problem with people who want TNN banned, but don't want things like Brainstorm, StP, Stoneforge Mystic, Deathrite Shaman banned is that those cards see more play across more decks and are arguably more powerful than TNN, so I see a real disconnect in people's arguments there.

Too bad we can't get a list of the most played cards without fetch/dual lands on it. That information would be more interesting.

TsumiBand

12-18-2013, 11:20 AM

Part of my problem with people who want TNN banned, but don't want things like Brainstorm, StP, Stoneforge Mystic, Deathrite Shaman banned is that those cards see more play across more decks and are arguably more powerful than TNN, so I see a real disconnect in people's arguments there.

See, I understood that argument to be based on the idea that the cards you mentioned enable more decks than they push out. Like, Swords to Plowshares has been giving White decks the means to handle all manner of shitty creature for years; but it doesn't keep creatures out. StP is not the reason people don't play aggro. The latest set of BG good cards have sprung up all over the place, and so maybe DRS is actually giving Noble Hierarch a mid-life crisis, but it hasn't been received as something which limits more strategies than it promotes. I don't think Brainstorm in and of itself is precluding decks from existing, despite the part where it says "draw three cards" on it.

Perhaps it is unfair to say that True-Name Nemesis does this, and perhaps it is just a fad card for now, hence it shows up in several Top 8s and people are gunning for it, so the metagame is a little bit 'too meta' or whatever that means. As much as I don't like the card personally, or maybe do not like that Blue has such solid aggressive creatures that 'just fly' or 'just beat'… I do not think there is enough data to say for sure whether or not this card is actually as over the top as it reads.

Skullcrack is a good call, as it just-so-happens to bork protection and be 3 damage for 2 mana. It isn't quite the kind of burn we typically enjoy, but making the case that unpreventable damage does beat up protection here and there (who doesn't want to see someone go "nice Progenitus, Skullcrack into Blasphemous Act FTW") may become more compelling if TNN proves itself to be too ubiquitous. If there were a playable 'damage cant be prevented' list, that's probably close to the top of it.

Feaor

12-18-2013, 11:54 AM

Not to derail the thread but Brainstorm isn't going to get banned because shockingly its a card people enjoy playing, in fact either Aaron Forsythe or MaRo went on the record at legacy event earlier this year or last year explicitly stating this. Cards like Brainstorm enable decks rather than push decks out, the reason we can have tempo decks that play as few as 18 lands is because Brainstorm exists. TNN on the other hand enables a few decks and pushes out every deck that wants to attack on the ground that can't effectively deal with it. This is shockingly similar to MM, it enabled a few decks like Stoneblade and NO RUG and pushed out every deck that wanted to resolve a bunch of 1 mana spells, granted I don't think its quite on the same level yet but it does seem like the potential is there. Also people were hilariously defending MM until the bitter end despite seeing top 16's where 13 decks were NO RUG or Stoneblade variants.

Zombie

12-18-2013, 12:10 PM

Again, why even bother with classifying a deck as a TNN deck or not? Why not look at the actual numbers of TNNs being played in T8's compared to other cards?

Because it's a metric that does not work. Let's take Elves, for example. From looking at the number of NOs and Glimpses in top8's, maindeck especially, you'd think Elves is a Glimpse deck. Which is wrong because Elves most definitely is a Natural Order deck first and foremost. Those UW Jace decks also probably run more Stoneforges than Jaces. A lot of ANT? Is it Ad Nauseam that is doing well, or Past in Flames? The numbers don't tell us, but an examination of the deck tells us it's a Past in Flames deck. Carsten's "Army of God"? 4 Jace, not a Jace deck. It's an Entreat the Angels deck.

Finn

12-18-2013, 01:58 PM

Admiral_Arzar

12-18-2013, 02:00 PM

Koby

12-18-2013, 02:06 PM

Folks, I asked the "stupid question" if there was evidence that Nemesis had pushed out decks. I see no convincing data or arguments to support the premise that it has done so more than any other strong card that we commonly see. As such, this is now an argument of "I don't like it." Well, I don't either, but it is an entirely stupid conversation to have for 40 pages. Can someone please lock this thread so that we can argue about something with an end goal.

I think it's too early to definitively say whether or not it has pushed anything out. My personal opinion is that it is simply another nail in the coffin of non-blue aggro (previous nails including Batterskull, Terminus, Griselbrand, etc.) but those decks were already in decline due to the aforementioned cards and the strategies they enable.

I agree with A_A that it's too early to notice at the macro level. I don't think there is a discrete deck that has been departed as a result of TNN being introduced. However, I suspect (and will need to verify with more tournament results) that diversity in the decks with Top finishes are becoming more homogenized. It might even be completely unrelated to TNN, as this tends to happen whenever there are high profile Legacy events (GP:DC, SCG Invitational, etc). Questions to keep in mind:

1. Is the variety of the top 50% 70% of well placing decks changing to fewer decks?
2. Is the concentration of blue-based decks increasing?
3. Are there certain wide archetypes (Control, Combo, Aggro) being skewed towards one extremity?

Personally, I don't care much for TNN. I refuse to drop $35 a piece on this card until I'm certain it won't be removed from the format. I don't care to play the decks that use it. I certainly don't think it's ban-worthy, but would have rather it not be printed.

EDIT: Quick inspection of TCdeck's data for the past few months shows that top 50% of the metagame is about 8 decks. I'm bumping this up to 70% to see more data.

ESG

12-18-2013, 02:34 PM

Questions to keep in mind:

1. Is the variety of the top 50% 70% of well placing decks changing to fewer decks?
2. Is the concentration of blue-based decks increasing?
3. Are there certain wide archetypes (Control, Combo, Aggro) being skewed towards one extremity?

These are excellent metrics to keep an eye on. Bob Huang has been conducting similar tracking: http://www.channelfireball.com/articles/december-2013-legacy-metagame-analysis/

Tormod

12-18-2013, 03:18 PM

These are excellent metrics to keep an eye on. Bob Huang has been conducting similar tracking: http://www.channelfireball.com/articles/december-2013-legacy-metagame-analysis/

The whole problem with Bob's article is that he doesn't include any data from the 1-3 months before the printing of True-Name Nemesis so there is no baseline or "control" to measure from. Looking at the archetypes produced by Bob's article, it doesn't look any different from any of the 3 previous months, thus no changes.

I do agree Esper stoneblade is doing better after falling off the face of the earth 10 months ago. But I don't think its makes it the hegemon of Legacy. I'm also very careful as to not name a "new best legacy deck" each week, because in reality it doesn't work that way.

Barook

12-18-2013, 03:18 PM

We have reached a 70+% Brainstorm meta in the last two months. I would attribute it to TNN - either you play TNN, Miracles as anti-deck or a blue-based combo. If TNN is the reason, I would certainly call that meta-warping.

Cards like Brainstorm enable decks rather than push decks out, the reason we can have tempo decks that play as few as 18 lands is because Brainstorm exists.

http://www.channelfireball.com/articles/december-2013-legacy-metagame-analysis/
It enables blue decks which leads to a diverse metagame of blue decks. I don't think "Play blue or GTFO!" to be competitive sounds like a healthy format in the long run (I can already hear some people screaming "Play Modern instead if you don't like blue!").

Now the question is what percentage of Brainstorm decks can still be considered "healthy". 50-60% like in the last two years sounds alright, but 70+% is really starting to push it.

Although TNN alone isn't the cause, but the numerous fuck-ups Wizards has produced in recent years, be it overpowered crap or violations of the color pie:

- Clique is a bit older, but does blue really need hand disruption, attached to a evasive clock?
- Delver: a 3 power flyer for :u: with a almost no drawback
- Snapcaster is in the wrong color (although he doesn't warp anything)
- various broken Timmy cards to feed S&T (yet another blue card)
- and now TNN

Arsenal

12-18-2013, 03:24 PM

The whole problem with Bob's article is that he doesn't include any data from the 1-3 months before the printing of True-Name Nemesis so there is no baseline or "control" to measure from. Looking at the archetypes produced by Bob's article, it doesn't look any different from any of the 3 previous months, thus no changes.

I do agree Esper stoneblade is doing better after falling off the face of the earth 10 months ago. But I don't think its makes it the hegemon of Legacy. I'm also very careful as to not name a "new best legacy deck" each week, because in reality it doesn't work that way.

Don't forget Bant Aggro. Check thecouncil's data for Bant Aggro pre-TNN and post-TNN, it's like night and day.

Lord Seth

12-18-2013, 04:59 PM

- Clique is a bit older, but does blue really need hand disruption, attached to a evasive clock?
- Delver: a 3 power flyer for :u: with a almost no drawback
You're right! Which is why every single Blue deck plays it. I mean, there's pretty much no drawback, so there's no reason for anyone who's on color with it to not play it! It's not like there's lots of Blue decks that don't play it, right?

Oh... wait...

Now, it's true that in particular decks, Delver has no real drawback. It fit straight into RUG Threshold, for example. But it truthfully is rather limited in what decks it can actually go into, and to claim it has "almost no drawback" is absolutely inaccurate.

Though I don't know why Delver gets the hate when the actual problem, if there is one, is obviously Brainstorm.

- Snapcaster is in the wrong color (although he doesn't warp anything)
Enh, kind of yes, kind of no. Snapcaster's ability is in Blue, but I do agree he should've been Red. If nothing else it would've made the Delver decks back in Standard a bit more diverse by giving them a reason to be something other than UW all day.

- various broken Timmy cards to feed S&T (yet another blue card)
Except Show and Tell was all the way from Urza's Saga, and those creatures in question aren't Blue (except for the odd Jin-Gitaxias in Reanimator). It's like whining that Blue Sun's Zenith is off color because it benefits High Tide, which is completely out of Blue. But no one would argue that Blue Sun's Zenith isn't rightfully a Blue card or by itself is too powerful. This is a major stretch on your part.

- and now TNN
Enh, fair point there.

Bed Decks Palyer

12-18-2013, 06:21 PM

It enables blue decks which leads to a diverse metagame of blue decks. I don't think "Play blue or GTFO!" to be competitive sounds like a healthy format in the long run (I can already hear some people screaming "Play Modern instead if you don't like blue!").
I hear you. I hear you screaming "Play Modern instead if you don't like blue!" Because if WotC ban Brainstorm, there will be one last format where to play Brainstorm.
As a one of.

Brainstorm. It isn't Ancestral Recall. Keep it in Legacy.

But, I quite agree with rest of your post. Esp. the part "play blue or get out of our format" is true. Funny thing is that I'm trying some brews these days, RG Prime Titan and WG Prime Titan, and similar stuff. And everytime I play the deck, even if it works, I'm just saying to myself "Well, it's pretty and all, but isn't it better to just BS into FoW/Stifle/Bolt, gg?" Ok, maybe I brew a bad brew, but reall,y every non-blue deck I tried in past months I just thrown away, be it whatever. Things went so far that I'm selling my stuff and keeping just RUG (I'd keep BURG, but money don't stink), whereas I'm rebuilding and PIMPING my twelve years old casual deck that I will never again play because our group is long dead, yet I still want to own a nice non-blue, non-retarded, non-8thEdition deck.

Except Show and Tell was all the way from Urza's Saga, and those creatures in question aren't Blue (except for the odd Jin-Gitaxias in Reanimator)...
Wasn't Show and Tell broken long before the omnomnom6 creature? I'm really asking, I did not play competitively back in early 200x.
I mean, what's the difference between Reanimating/Exhuming a Verdant Froce and Showing it? In first case you need Entomb and it's a two-cards turn2 combo. In second case you need additional Ritual/Petal to make it similarly fast, or you may just play a two-cards turn3 combo with a danger of opponent putting some monster into play. that way or another, there's a huge monster across you.
I'd be surprised if it wasn't played like this in old Type XYZ.
Also, for me it doesn't really matter if SnT is blue or whatever the color, as long as it promotes such thrilling and enjoyable games like "Ponder, no shuffle, Tomb, SnT, gg". At least with storm it is deserved win, or at the very least it looks like deserved win, but Ponder, gg... um sorry.

I thought about few things in past days. As the color pie is blurred and in fact it's about blue can it all - they should definitely print a :u::u: Sinkhole and :u: Bolt - while the rest of colors simulate the pie, why not simply abolish it completely.
In chess there are black and white pawns and knights and those other, and while they differ in color, they can the same. So lets make itlike in chess, keep the nonsense for the flavor text, spread the abilities equally amongst the colors and be done with it.

Barook

12-18-2013, 06:47 PM

You're right! Which is why every single Blue deck plays it. I mean, there's pretty much no drawback, so there's no reason for anyone who's on color with it to not play it! It's not like there's lots of Blue decks that don't play it, right?

Oh... wait...

Now, it's true that in particular decks, Delver has no real drawback. It fit straight into RUG Threshold, for example. But it truthfully is rather limited in what decks it can actually go into, and to claim it has "almost no drawback" is absolutely inaccurate.

Though I don't know why Delver gets the hate when the actual problem, if there is one, is obviously Brainstorm.
Brainstorm does actually blue things. And library manipulation in general makes Delver strong (see: Ponder/Delver in Standard). Brainstorm just adds to the problem. Plus, hyper-aggressive evasive 1-drops aren't exactly part of the blue color pie unless Maro makes another asspull. Of course you can't jam Delver into any deck. The decks which can break and abuse a card are the problem, not the decks that play fair.

Except Show and Tell was all the way from Urza's Saga, and those creatures in question aren't Blue (except for the odd Jin-Gitaxias in Reanimator). It's like whining that Blue Sun's Zenith is off color because it benefits High Tide, which is completely out of Blue. But no one would argue that Blue Sun's Zenith isn't rightfully a Blue card or by itself is too powerful. This is a major stretch on your part.
Show & Tell is a blue card. Show and Tell does not care about the color of "insert Timmy card here". By printing Emrakul, Griselbrand and Omniscience, they made S&T alot stronger and thus promoted playing blue. Sure, stuff like Tin Fins can abuse them, too, but Tin Fins isn't a Tier 1 Deck while S&T is.

Wasn't Show and Tell broken long before the omnomnom6 creature? I'm really asking, I did not play competitively back in early 200x.
I mean, what's the difference between Reanimating/Exhuming a Verdant Froce and Showing it? In first case you need Entomb and it's a two-cards turn2 combo. In second case you need additional Ritual/Petal to make it similarly fast, or you may just play a two-cards turn3 combo with a danger of opponent putting some monster into play. that way or another, there's a huge monster across you.
I'd be surprised if it wasn't played like this in old Type XYZ.
Also, for me it doesn't really matter if SnT is blue or whatever the color, as long as it promotes such thrilling and enjoyable games like "Ponder, no shuffle, Tomb, SnT, gg". At least with storm it is deserved win, or at the very least it looks like deserved win, but Ponder, gg... um sorry.
S&T was abused since Day 1 to put Mind over Matter into play in Academy type decks. As far as Legacy is concerned, only Emrakul, Griselbrand and Omniscience made it into the powerhouse that it is today since they all scream "WIN NOW!".

ESG

12-18-2013, 06:55 PM

Wasn't Show and Tell broken long before the omnomnom6 creature? I'm really asking, I did not play competitively back in early 200x. I mean, what's the difference between Reanimating/Exhuming a Verdant Froce and Showing it? In first case you need Entomb and it's a two-cards turn2 combo. In second case you need additional Ritual/Petal to make it similarly fast, or you may just play a two-cards turn3 combo with a danger of opponent putting some monster into play. that way or another, there's a huge monster across you.

No. In fact, Show and Tell was considered only fringe playable in Legacy until the past couple of years. What made Show and Tell powerful was that WOTC printed overpowered, game-ending permanents that you could cheat in. Show and Tell is only as good as the best thing you can cheat in. Sure, Verdant Force was a card in the old Extended, but it eats a Swords to Plowshares like any other plant. Just for fun, I searched TC Decks for Show and Tell from 2004 through December 2010 and got zero results. Results begin in January 2011. This doesn't mean the card didn't get played at all; it just means that it basically wasn't on anyone's radar at the time because it wasn't considered playable.

Also, Entomb was banned up until September 2009.

Julian23

12-18-2013, 07:13 PM

I remember the breakout tournament being the German Magic 1 in Dec 2009 (2010?) where this guy piloted a homebrew using Show and Tell, Dream Halls and Cruel Ultimatum + Progenitus to 1st place.

Lord Seth

12-18-2013, 08:31 PM

Show & Tell is a blue card.It's also a very old card. You're trying to make the argument about what they've been doing recently. Sure, cards like Emrakul/Griselbrand were printed far more recently... but by themselves they're fine, the complaint is about Show and Tell, a card from long ago.

Show and Tell does not care about the color of "insert Timmy card here". By printing Emrakul, Griselbrand and Omniscience, they made S&T alot stronger and thus promoted playing blue. Sure, stuff like Tin Fins can abuse them, too, but Tin Fins isn't a Tier 1 Deck while S&T is.
But this is again all tied back into something they did years and years and years ago.

People always seem to complain about how they printed some card that's good with Show and Tell, but the problem there is Show and Tell, not the new card.

(nameless one)

12-18-2013, 10:17 PM

I am almost certain that Brainstorm was pretty unplayable until Onslaught.

I am also certain Stoneforge Mystic didn't see Legacy play until New Phyrexia. Well it did but everyone disregarded it. Remember the Excalibur thread here on the Source?

Remember when Grindstone and Helm of Obedience were in the jank rare bins?

Just because a card wasn't played before, it doesn't mean that it will always suck. Arguing Show and Tell was fine because no one played it back in 2009 doesn't make sense to me.

sublime love

12-18-2013, 10:25 PM

Simple answer, NO
Its legacy, broken cards are the norm. Giving "fair" decks, aka decks that win by turn dudes sideways, a good creature, that will end the game is good. There are plenty of ways to kill it. Counterspell, discard, edict, Liliana, wrath effects...
It just makes decks go back to the way they were before abrupt decay. now they need that edict again, or more Liliana, and less jace.
True name rarely wins the game. Its the jitte/equipment that is equipped that makes the game end.
"if you can't beat them, join them. or just count to ten"

Deadpool09

12-18-2013, 11:05 PM

I did some light play testing tonight with some local grinders. I played dark maverick(drs,abrupt decay) vs uwr delver with 2 tnn, and esper stone blade,. 5 games each then another 5 with sideboard
Maverick vs uwr pre board: maverick won 3-2 post board uwr delver won 3-2
Maverick vs esper pre board : maverick won 3-2 post board esper won 4-1
granted, I'm an esper deathblade player, I'm not an expert with this version of maverick so I probably did not play the deck optimally.but I never felt I was behind the whole entire time. Except vs esper. Which is loaded with board wipes. Maverick loses to board wipes regardless if they're playing tnn or not. I feel like this is one of the decks that doesn't care about tnn. I know people like to argue the fact that it's all about combo, or decks that ignore or race tnn.
For fucks sake, it's only a card. There's a lot more to the deck more than that. Try to beat the dek not just the card. If you can't interact with it efficiently, then interact with the other cards. If you're deck simply loses to 1 single card and you can't figure out how to beat or adapt it, then your sheltering your self away from all the possible answers, or youre just being lazy . Elves can beat it, maverick can, affinity can race it , Jund and shardless bug can out value it, I saw death and taxes made a deathblade player look like an idiot with it. 1 creature would not invalidate a whole dek like some of the whiners here claim to be.

Bed Decks Palyer

12-19-2013, 05:29 AM

S&T was abused since Day 1 to put Mind over Matter into play in Academy type decks. As far as Legacy is concerned, only Emrakul, Griselbrand and Omniscience made it into the powerhouse that it is today since they all scream "WIN NOW!".

Thanks for the info! I didn't know this. And it surprises me that I didn't think about this combo.

No. In fact, Show and Tell was considered only fringe playable in Legacy until the past couple of years. What made Show and Tell powerful was that WOTC printed overpowered, game-ending permanents that you could cheat in. Show and Tell is only as good as the best thing you can cheat in. Sure, Verdant Force was a card in the old Extended, but it eats a Swords to Plowshares like any other plant. Just for fun, I searched TC Decks for Show and Tell from 2004 through December 2010 and got zero results. Results begin in January 2011. This doesn't mean the card didn't get played at all; it just means that it basically wasn't on anyone's radar at the time because it wasn't considered playable.

Also, Entomb was banned up until September 2009.
I wasn't asking only about Legacy. Thats why I wrote old Type XYZ.
I remember reading some old article on the old (cca those early 200x) Extended and the play Entomb->Verdant Force->Exhume was mentioned. It is of no surprise, seen how the reanimator decks of today work, that SnT popped up on my mind and thus I asked if a similar play SnT->Verdant Force (or whatever the big bad dude) was common. The fact that Verdant Force is bad has nothing to do with SnT been bad, it's a little bit like saying Necropotence is weak, because all that you have drawn are 2/1 clerics. Just off the top of my head I can name Multani, Maro Sorcerer or Akroma, Angel of Wrath or any other huge/huge creature with some kind of protection. Or Dream Halls.
In before the "dude, card XY was banned in Type AlphaBeta from 23 Brumaire An CCX"... I was just asking if SnT seen play in the old times, I'm not rebuilding some ancestral decks, neither am I comparing the power level of Verdant Force and Griselbrand.

The fact that SnT kills by overpowered, game-ending permanents has very little to do with Verdant Force. If that whole strategy (cheating something into play) is wrong, broken and deserves hit by banhammer, what would you rather ban: SnT (enabler) or any of the finishers? Banning SnT solves the problem forever (like banning Necropotence), otoh it completely wrecks one archetype. Banning finishers doesn't solve the problem (esp. considering WotC's - and mainly Maro's - boner for Timmy crap) forever, as there might be another troublesome permanent in the future, but it takes away whole part of the brokeness that SnT allows now. Lets say they ban Omniscience (which is a stupid card SnT or not), Griselbrand (7/7 flying, lifelink, bargain; seriously?) and maybe Iona+Emmy, while keep the SnT so that players may combo with Dream Halls or kill with Inkwell, SSS, Terastodon, Akroma, Sphinx of the Steel Wind or T. Tyrant. SnT would be still pretty powerful but definitely not broken.
In before the "dude, but SnT isn't broken, just learn how to play against it"... I'm not saying it deserves ban or whatever, I'm simply asking what do the people rather see banned in case WotC decides to weaken/kill the deck.

It's also a very old card. You're trying to make the argument about what they've been doing recently. Sure, cards like Emrakul/Griselbrand were printed far more recently... but by themselves they're fine, the complaint is about Show and Tell, a card from long ago.

But this is again all tied back into something they did years and years and years ago.

People always seem to complain about how they printed some card that's good with Show and Tell, but the problem there is Show and Tell, not the new card.
Depends. Clearly the problem is in their combination.
Snt without anything broken to show is a one-shot Elvish Piper.
Omniscience without a way how to cheat it into play is Wild Evocation. (Btw, it's the penultimate card on cernyrytir.cz list of rare enchantments; I find it funny that the second cheapest rare enchantment is similar to Omni, if not for that, I'd name Field of Souls, of course.)

Just because a card wasn't played before, it doesn't mean that it will always suck. Arguing Show and Tell was fine because no one played it back in 2009 doesn't make sense to me.
This.

For fucks sake, it's only a card. There's a lot more to the deck more than that. Try to beat the dek not just the card. If you can't interact with it efficiently, then interact with the other cards. If you're deck simply loses to 1 single card and you can't figure out how to beat or adapt it, then your sheltering your self away from all the possible answers, or youre just being lazy .
This.
But the card is still ugly.