Would you like to see True-Name Nemesis gone?

[Erdvermampfa]

True-Name Nemesis

Since we probably have been able to get an opinion on this controversial card by now, I would like to survey peoples' sentiments whether it should be banned or not from legacy. I think a survey is legitimate because there have been a lot of demands for a ban while others have downright contrary views. I'm aware that those subjects are usually discussed in the B&R thread but it's only possible to quantify the sentiments of the players by creating a single thread with a poll for this specific matter so I hope the mods don't mind.

[Grand Superior]

It falls under my category of "it isn't oppressive enough to be banned, but I'd be okay with it not being in the format" together with Delver of Secrets and Show and Tell.

It's a relatively reasonable card but I think the biggest hit against it is that it is blue. Like Snapcaster Mage and Delver of Secrets, it would have been a positive card if it was non-blue. True-Name Nemesis would've been a fine white card and the 1WW cost would have created interesting deckbuilding choices (thought it may boost Death and Taxes too much). As a blue card, it just gives blue decks yet another tool that they really didn't need.

[ESG]

I would give up a stack of dual lands to see this card gone.

[nedleeds]

Unban black vise, sotf, earthcraft, mind twist. Thx.

[warai]

I think we should give 2 months or so for the meta to adapt and then formulate opinions. Now is way too soon ;)


True-Name Nemesis

Since we probably have been able to get an opinion on this controversial card by now, I would like to survey peoples' sentiments whether it should be banned or not from legacy. I think a survey is legitimate because there have been a lot of demands for a ban while others have downright contrary views. I'm aware that those subjects are usually discussed in the B&R thread but it's only possible to quantify the sentiments of the players by creating a single thread with a poll for this specific matter so I hope the mods don't mind.

[bjholmes3]

In a meta where Emrakul can hit the field with haste on turn 2 consistently, we're worried about a pseudo-invincible 3 drop? Nah. We just need to get used to the fact that a good new card still actually gets printed every 6 months or so nowadays, lol.

[apple713]

Its not banworthy but its poor design. It improved midranged decks which didnt really need help

[Lord Seth]

In a meta where Emrakul can hit the field with haste on turn 2 consistently, we're worried about a pseudo-invincible 3 drop? Nah. We just need to get used to the fact that a good new card still actually gets printed every 6 months or so nowadays, lol.
"Consistently"? Things have to line up very, very well to be able to get a hasted Emrakul on turn 2.

As for the question, I need clarification. Is it asking if I want it removed via a banning, or is it a more hypothetical "do you wish it hadn't been printed in the first place?" question. Because those are two very different questions.

[Fatal]

Reasons for banning:
- Worst design card ever seen - really in more then 20 years this card is probably the worst ever - shame you R&D team(exclude early ante cards and some chaos warp/falling star).
- probably the most un-interactive creature ever printed - Hexproof with uncounterable and regenration(aka some Troll) wasn't so un-interactive as this one.
- R&D please don't be daltonist on blue - we already have most aggresive creature in blue - delver, we don't need the most defensive creature in blue..
- destroy all midrange creature-base decks which pop and and are good add for meta - really facing any other deck then BUG/RUG/Combo is very comfortable on tournament - it's really fun !

[GoblinZ]

Its not banworthy but its poor design. It improved midranged decks which didnt really need help

Agree. Since I play combo, I donnot even know if it is broken or not, but I really really dislike it.

[chariot1995]

True-Name Nemesis

Since we probably have been able to get an opinion on this controversial card by now, I would like to survey peoples' sentiments whether it should be banned or not from legacy. I think a survey is legitimate because there have been a lot of demands for a ban while others have downright contrary views. I'm aware that those subjects are usually discussed in the B&R thread but it's only possible to quantify the sentiments of the players by creating a single thread with a poll for this specific matter so I hope the mods don't mind.

No, there are multiple answers like Veil, its beatable and changes a meta that doesn't change often, all for it

[thecrav]

I think we should give 2 months or so for the meta to adapt and then formulate opinions. Now is way too soon ;)

This 100% - I'd go so far as to say that unless WotC prints another Memory Jar or something, we should pretty much skip talking about bans for at least three months after a card becomes available, preferably more like six.

[Tormod]

I'd be fine if they never printed True-Name Nemesis.
Protection from player is a little "unintuitive"

No, I don't think it should be banned. This is Legacy, not Modern.

The only acceptable justification in banning True-Name Nemesis is if tournament attendance is significantly declines.

[Esper3k]

- probably the most un-interactive creature ever printed - Hexproof with uncounterable and regenration(aka some Troll) wasn't so un-interactive as this one.


Progenitus would like to have a word with you...

Norin the Wary is pretty difficult to interact with as well.

[warfordium]

just give us mystical tutor back. :trollface:

[Bed Decks Palyer]

Reasons for banning:
- Worst design card ever seen - really in more then 20 years this card is probably the worst ever - shame you R&D team(exclude early ante cards and some chaos warp/falling star).
- probably the most un-interactive creature ever printed - Hexproof with uncounterable and regenration(aka some Troll) wasn't so un-interactive as this one.
- R&D please don't be daltonist on blue - we already have most aggresive creature in blue - delver, we don't need the most defensive creature in blue..
- destroy all midrange creature-base decks which pop and and are good add for meta - really facing any other deck then BUG/RUG/Combo is very comfortable on tournament - it's really fun !

Worst design ever? Find the thread dedicated to Great Wall, then.
Btw, I'd really love to see a bit more Chaos Warp-like and Falling Star-like cards. You know, kind of a cards that are funny or interesting. I know that a bulk of red part of pie must be " Deal 2 dmg" and "destroy target target" and "when ~ etb, deal some dmg", etc. There are 3828 red cards that our lgs sells and out of them I count some ten cards interesting and different enough that one may send them as an SSS gift.
So we're discussing banning of Troll Ascetic? Fine. Sadly I can't comment on TNN as I never met one IRL. It is legal for... three weeks? And people already want it to be banned? Strange.
Not that the design isn't idiotic (similarly to that of Griselbrand and emrakul, when speaking of creatures, and of course Delver plus Goyf), but is it really necessary to ban it?
As Esper3k wrote: Norin the Wary is pretty difficult to interact with as well.

[Illusions]

Fun is far too subjective for it to be a valid reason for banning a card; in my opinion, cards should only ever be banned if they are having a detrimental effect on the balance of the game. TNN is a stupid card, but answers exist. I don't see how it's any more or less ridiculous than being wasteland locked, unable to cast your cards due to chalice or blood moon, or being grinded out by punishing fire or jitte. It exists, and we all need to play around it for the time being. If it's a problem, it'll get banned, but it should be given the chance to prove itself problematic first. This isn't modern, and cards in legacy should only ever be banned based on good reason.

Sent from my RM-825_apac_australia_new_zealand_259 using Tapatalk

[Goaswerfraiejen]

I voted yes. Not because I think it's warping or incredibly broken, but because it's just awful to sit across from it. Emrakul too, FWIW.



Also, I loathe the thought of having to abandon NOPro and run it instead. Shudder.

[Squirrel]

True Name Nemesis is one of those cards people will cry for a ban.. like Show and Tell/whatever you lost to at your last tournament. It is a good card, and sometimes good cards win the game alone.

It comes down to the one thing nobody wants to hear: IF you have a bad matchup against Bant/Esper/decks with Nemesis (they're not nemesis.dec), consider switching:
- cards in your maindeck (Death& Taxes: i switched Sword of fire and ice in for sword of light and shadow and added back some flyers)
- cards in your sideboard( Esperblade: i now play Zealous Persecution)
- decks ( Im already playing storm)

I don't like the card, but i like Mystical Tutor and Survival. Liking a card is not the Reason to ban it (except Modern with Seething Song, it seems).

So, it should stay, but a more flexible card would`ve been better.

About the Hasty Emrakul thing on Turn 2, With Sneak Attack you have to get quite lucky, and with Tinfins Emrakul seems like a bad choice unless he is holding hands with a lifelink demon while attacking.

[phonics]

True Name Nemesis is one of those cards people will cry for a ban.. like Show and Tell/whatever you lost to at your last tournament. It is a good card, and sometimes good cards win the game alone.

It comes down to the one thing nobody wants to hear: IF you have a bad matchup against Bant/Esper/decks with Nemesis (they're not nemesis.dec), consider switching:
- cards in your maindeck (Death& Taxes: i switched Sword of fire and ice in for sword of light and shadow and added back some flyers)
- cards in your sideboard( Esperblade: i now play Zealous Persecution)
- decks ( Im already playing storm)

I don't like the card, but i like Mystical Tutor and Survival. Liking a card is not the Reason to ban it (except Modern with Seething Song, it seems).

So, it should stay, but a more flexible card would`ve been better.

About the Hasty Emrakul thing on Turn 2, With Sneak Attack you have to get quite lucky, and with Tinfins Emrakul seems like a bad choice unless he is holding hands with a lifelink demon while attacking.

I get the sense that most people just think that it shouldn't exist because of its terrible design, not how good it is.

[Squirrel]

I get the sense that most people just think that it shouldn't exist because of its terrible design, not how good it is.

i know, but in my opinion, terrible Design is not a reason to get a card banned. Also, it is a quite new( and in some way innovative) Designs. Yes, it limits interaction, but isn't that a big part of legacy (any hard and softlock, Combo, manadenial etc. )

[MGB]

i know, but in my opinion, terrible Design is not a reason to get a card banned. Also, it is a quite new( and in some way innovative) Designs. Yes, it limits interaction, but isn't that a big part of legacy (any hard and softlock, Combo, manadenial etc. )

The problem lies in decreased interaction during combat. It turns the format into Combo, TNN aggro, and anti-TNN aggro. It makes the game less rich, less diverse, and less interesting.

There is very little that TNN actually adds to the format. It just makes existing tier 1 decks like Stoneblade and Delver even harder to deal with unless you're playing combo. Not everyone wants to play TNN.dec OR Combo.

And again, it's just *insanely* bad design. The kind of design that would be laughed out of R&D even 10 years ago. There's a reason stuff like this was traditionally put in green and/or only given hexproof (and not the whole pro:player unockability).

[mini1337s]

The problem lies in decreased interaction during combat. It turns the format into Combo, TNN aggro, and anti-TNN aggro. It makes the game less rich, less diverse, and less interesting.

There is very little that TNN actually adds to the format. It just makes existing tier 1 decks like Stoneblade and Delver even harder to deal with unless you're playing combo. Not everyone wants to play TNN.dec OR Combo.

And again, it's just *insanely* bad design. The kind of design that would be laughed out of R&D even 10 years ago. There's a reason stuff like this was traditionally put in green and/or only given hexproof (and not the whole pro:player unockability).
Glad to see that TNN invalidated Control :rolleyes:

Aside from Death and Taxes, what creature based decks that can't roll over it or deal with it (albeit with some minor changes). With the exception of red, there are answers in every color, most of which are commonly played already. You can fight it on the stack AND when it has resolved.

If you can't deal with Turn 3 TNN, how in fuck's name are you dealing with Turn 3 Hasty Emrakul?

[MGB]

Glad to see that TNN invalidated Control :rolleyes:

Aside from Death and Taxes, what creature based decks that can't roll over it or deal with it (albeit with some minor changes). With the exception of red, there are answers in every color, most of which are commonly played already. You can fight it on the stack AND when it has resolved.

If you can't deal with Turn 3 TNN, how in fuck's name are you dealing with Turn 3 Hasty Emrakul?

Turn emrakul is only possible through a combo. It means only a certain type of deck can do this and exposes itself to everything that is good vs combo,and has all the downfalls of combo as well. AND there are ways to target Emrakul with non-instants like Karakas, ORing, Jace etc.

Any blue deck can play TNN for 1uu without difficulty and have an unstoppable wincon vs opposing fair aggro decks.

[Dice_Box]

I think that, if the comments are true, he was made for Commander. Let him stay there where he has answers. His design limits answers in a duel and thus I feel he should be played where he was "designed" to be.

[(nameless one)]

I would like to see it banned so I wouldn't have to change my sideboard....

/sarcasm

[Zilla]

"Would you like to see True-Name Nemesis gone" and "Should True-Name Nemesis be banned" are two different questions, to which the answers are "yes" and "no" respectively.

[The Treefolk Master]

"Would you like to see True-Name Nemesis gone" and "Should True-Name Nemesis be banned" are two different questions, to which the answers are "yes" and "no" respectively.

Agreed. I didn't notice the question on the poll was different than the thread's title until I had already voted.

[Erdvermampfa]

Please stop being so pedantic and don't pretend that you wouldn't get the question.

[Megadeus]

"Would you like to see True-Name Nemesis gone" and "Should True-Name Nemesis be banned" are two different questions, to which the answers are "yes" and "no" respectively.

This.

[nedleeds]

I wouldn't care about him if I could lock him under Stasis and kill his owner with a Black Vise. True Name would seem downright neighborly.

[Megadeus]

He's dumb, annoying, and uninteractive, but not broken.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

It's weird and dumb that Legacy players pretend that, "Should this card not exist" and "Should this card be banned" are significantly different questions.

If a card actively makes the format worse for existing, why wouldn't you ban it?

[nedleeds]

Because worse is really subjective. I don't think Black Vise makes the format worse, I don't think Survival makes the format worse. Others probably do. I'd rather unban cards than ban more cards. Unbanning cards that require building decks around them like Black Vise, Earthcraft, Survival and maybe Dragon is interesting. Mental Mistep is not interesting, you simply play 4 unless you are playing Chalice on 1. TNN isn't particularly interesting but it isn't any more powerful than some other creatures like Stoneforge, Delver, Clique and Tarmogoyf.

[Lemnear]

TNN is only the next Tarmogoyf to make a lot of other previous viable options obsolete. Maybe it does the same to Tarmogoyf what Goofy did to werebear and psychatog

[Barook]

The Gentleman's Agreement

When we saw the Grand Prix–Madrid finals decks, a few of us got worried, jumped onto Magic Online, and started playing some Legacy with them. We were terrified by what we found. Although we were playing in the tournament practice room, which is hardly the same thing as a real tournament environment, we weren't losing very many matches with either Reanimator or Ad Nauseam. In my case, I don't recall losing any matches with either deck outside of a misclick while I was still learning the Ad Nauseam deck. The decks were just so strong that opponents not set up in their maindecks or that didn't sideboard heavily against us couldn't compete.

Our research took another turn, however, when we investigated how Legacy is played in the real world. We discovered something rather interesting, and that is that Mystical Tutor decks were quite rare at Legacy tournaments that did not have tons of money on the line. At Grand Prix and other cash tournaments, people were happy to bust out their Mystical Tutorss. However, in the comfort of their home stores they seemed to prefer doing other things that were more fun, if perhaps less powerful. This struck me as being a sort of gentleman's agreement; everyone knew what sick decks were out there, but they chose not to play them.

Having played with the Mystical Tutor decks, we knew what the alternative was. In order to stop a Mystical Tutor deck, people needed to either play decks full of things like Stifle, Daze, and Force of Will, or sideboard heavily into graveyard hate and cards like Mindbreak Trap. For Reanimator, that wasn't even a big deal sometimes, as it could sideboard Pithing Needles; and Ad Nauseam Tendrils could go through Mindbreak Trap and Force of Will fairly easily with a few well-placed Duresses or Thoughtseizes. After sideboarding, the games were all about the hate cards, which struck us as being a little unhealthy. Worse, Mystical Tutor often allowed these decks to heap resiliency on the hate at very little cost by adding only a single card like Show and Tell or Wipe Away—and they could Mystical Tutor for them.

The fascinating thing about the aforementioned agreement is that it seemed that the people who were part of the gentleman's agreement were having more fun than the people who weren't. Whether or not they were aware that there was anything special going on, they were experiencing a better variety of decks and a higher quantity of recognizable baseline Magic gameplay—even though they were still playing with nearly every Magic card that has been printed. We saw the world they had made, and we liked it. We liked it so much more than the competitive world that had Mystical Tutor decks that we decided to give that happier world to everyone.

I know how ridiculous people called the Gentleman's Agreement, yet here we are, screaming for the same thing which has been laughed at before.

The baseline is:

- TNN forces the format into a) Combo b) TNN decks and c) Anti-TNN decks that require either counters, discard or very narrow answers.
- TNN sucks the fun out of the format and we'd be all better off without it in the format.

[lordofthepit]

It's weird and dumb that Legacy players pretend that, "Should this card not exist" and "Should this card be banned" are significantly different questions.

If a card actively makes the format worse for existing, why wouldn't you ban it?

Because there are negative consequences associated with banning cards with respect to consumer confidence in the format and in Magic products.

[Dzra]

Yeah, I really dislike the card and wish it had never been conceived (or at least that they had made it an ETB trigger that targets the player or something that could be interacted with on at least a few points). However... it's here now in all of its uninteractive glory, so let's just see what happens. I'd say that by the time GP Paris is done, we should have a better idea of how the format adjusts.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

Because there are negative consequences associated with banning cards with respect to consumer confidence in the format and in Magic products.

Yeah, that's bullshit.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

Because worse is really subjective.

Life is hard.


I don't think Black Vise makes the format worse, I don't think Survival makes the format worse. Others probably do. I'd rather unban cards than ban more cards. Unbanning cards that require building decks around them like Black Vise, Earthcraft, Survival and maybe Dragon is interesting. Mental Mistep is not interesting, you simply play 4 unless you are playing Chalice on 1. TNN isn't particularly interesting but it isn't any more powerful than some other creatures like Stoneforge, Delver, Clique and Tarmogoyf.

This isn't a banning philosophy, it is a pastiche of unrelated opinions.

[Teluin]

Because there are negative consequences associated with banning cards with respect to consumer confidence in the format and in Magic products.

I'm really on the fence about the whole thing. I definitely wish they hadn't printed the card but I acknowledge that banning it could set a precedence. If WotC does acknowledge the public outcry over this card, I hope their approach to banning it would be an intelligent one. Perhaps something similar to the ante cards - "TNN was designed with multiplayer in mind and thus shouldn't be played in a 1v1 format".

[lordofthepit]

Yeah, that's bullshit.

The fact that you pretend that you can't see the difference is bullshit.

Thought experiment: if Wizards printed a card that is totally bonkers and breaks every single format, would you consider the situation completely rectified if they emergency banned the card after the card has been released but before it is officially legal (i.e. during the prerelease period)? Or would you consider it a fuckup of epic proportions?

[stage]

Like others have said, I'd be happier if it weren't in the format because of its really boring, uninteractive design (and the fact that it's in blue...)

That said, it doesn't seem format-warping enough to be banworthy

[Zombie]

Just saw the SCG Delver mirror match. Wow. Such excitement.

[Zilla]

If a card actively makes the format worse for existing, why wouldn't you ban it?
Because "worse for existing" in this context is entirely subjective, and you know it. The day that becomes valid criteria for banning is the day the format comes apart at the seams. There are plenty of people who believe(d) that Lackey made the format worse for existing. Or FoW. Or Brainstorm. Or Tarmogoyf. Or Top. Or Show and Tell. Or any other number of cards. That doesn't mean they're right.

The only objective way to judge whether a card makes the format "worse" is whether it's warping the format, and even that is extremely subjective, albeit somewhat less so. (Cue Brainstorm banning argument for the next 50 pages.)

[Zombie]

More super exciting TNN action on SCG stream.

EDIT: Hadn't internalized that TNN stops Jitte too. So fucking glad I play combo atm. This is a travesty.

[Higgs]

Just saw the SCG Delver mirror match. Wow. Such excitement.

I wished the other guy topdecked a Jitte as well so they could both hammer each other with 2 TNNs and a Jitte. So many decisions.

http://www.animatedgif.net/violent/warcraft2_fight_scene_e0.gif


So fucking glad I play combo atm. This is a travesty.

So true.

[ESG]

Thought experiment: if Wizards printed a card that is totally bonkers and breaks every single format, would you consider the situation completely rectified if they emergency banned the card after the card has been released but before it is officially legal (i.e. during the prerelease period)? Or would you consider it a fuckup of epic proportions?

This is similar to what happened with Memory Jar back in the day.
http://www.starcitygames.com/php/news/print.php?Article=10023

Also, Hulk-Flash happened.

WOTC prints a lot of cards, and mistakes happen. Banning mistakes is a good thing. It would have been easy to print True-Name Nemesis so that it worked in Commander but wasn't abusive in Legacy.

[nedleeds]

(Cue Brainstorm banning argument for the next 50 pages.)

7/8 at this weeks SCG.Yay stale as a day old fart!

[Worldslayer]

First creatures came for the combo players
and you didn't speak out because you weren't a combo player.

Then creatures came for the control players
and you didn't speak out because you weren't a control player.

Then creatures came for the gimmick players
and you didn't speak out because you weren't a gimmick player

Then creatures came for you
and there were no spells left to play for you

[Hof]

I don't think TNN is something Legacy can't handle. I voted yes mostly because I don't like the card design. But I also really hate the trend Wizards has started with printing a single, RARE Legacy bomb in every commander set and making so many pay a lot of money for one card and a pile of worthless commander cards just to keep up. Then they conclude how popular commander is, and repeat the scam. There should be a law against rubbish like that. Actually I suspect the majority of cards from boosters end in the garbage bin sooner or later. Hasbro is a mass producer of garbage.

[clavio]

No way! He's not even close to as good as tarmogoyf was when he first got printed. Three mana gets you show and fucking tell. Give me a break. It seems like every time there's a new sheriff in town people want to ban the shit out of him. Just skim through the banned thread to see what I mean. Not too long ago people wanted to ban deathrite shaman!

[Zilla]

No way! He's not even close to as good as tarmogoyf was when he first got printed. Three mana gets you show and fucking tell. Give me a break. It seems like every time there's a new sheriff in town people want to ban the shit out of him. Just skim through the banned thread to see what I mean. Not too long ago people wanted to ban deathrite shaman!
I think that most people want it banned not because it's too powerful, but because it's a terribly designed card that makes for terribly uninteresting games of Magic.

[AngryTroll]

I think we should give 2 months or so for the meta to adapt and then formulate opinions. Now is way too soon ;)

True-Name Nemesis has only been legal for a few weeks. It should be given at least a few months before deciding if it is banworthy.

[bjholmes3]

I don't understand this mindset. Fighting games have the same thing going for them; new revision of a game comes out, suddenly every change to the character they don't play is broken and needs to be nerfed. Oh no, TNN makes me consider changing my deck to deal with him! BAN!

[twndomn]

All these ban crying advocates own decks like Death and Taxes. TNN is forcing them to change decks.

The real problem is Show and Tell, just look at all the Sneak and Show players winning trophies and titles by slaying the TNN decks.

[Barook]

All these ban crying advocates own decks like Death and Taxes. TNN is forcing them to change decks.

The real problem is Show and Tell, just look at all the Sneak and Show players winning trophies and titles by slaying the TNN decks.
But D&T (at least the flyer-heavy version with SoFaI) has already proven that they can easily race TNN. And D&T is favored against Sneak & Show.

[lordofthepit]

I don't understand this mindset. Fighting games have the same thing going for them; new revision of a game comes out, suddenly every change to the character they don't play is broken and needs to be nerfed. Oh no, TNN makes me consider changing my deck to deal with him! BAN!

I'm not sure if I speak for everyone, but I don't hate TNN because it is broken. I hate it because it leads to very uninteractive games, and it happens to be extremely powerful. I'll probably be playing exclusively TNN builds when I find out exactly what I want to play, and I'm probably looking to acquire another playset reluctantly.

I don't play fighting games. But I am familiar enough with Super Street Fighter to know that after every few characters in the tournament mode, you get a stage where you try to kick the crap out of a car or some boxes, rather than a non-playable character. TNN has the effect of reducing Magic matches to something like that.

[Richard Cheese]

Gone? Yes. Banned? No.

[lordofthepit]

Gone? Yes. Banned? No.

+1

[Zombie]

Gone and banned. This is not a job, people. If the games are genuinely uninteresting and dull, that's totally a reason to kick the bugger out of the format.

[lordofthepit]

Gone and banned. This is not a job, people. If the games are genuinely uninteresting and dull, that's totally a reason to kick the bugger out of the format.

Three weeks isn't enough for me to want a banhammer yet.

[Koby]

I would rather the card be gone. I don't think it warrants a ban.

Guess that means I'm playing a combo deck for the next few months.
(Shit who am I fooling. I've been playing Combo for months already :laugh:)

[thecrav]

Gone? Yes. Banned? No.

That's some "It's a Wonderful Life" shit right there.

[Wilkin]

I'd like to see it gone, but it won't. Just when I thought it couldn't get more annoying than Geist of Saint Traft....

Watched Starcitygames coverage yesterday. True Name vs another one. Boring. Way to go Wizards, I guess you really want Legacy to die huh?

[MGB]

Gone and banned. This is not a job, people. If the games are genuinely uninteresting and dull, that's totally a reason to kick the bugger out of the format.

Exactly.

True Name Nemesis is one of those terribly designed cards that brings NOTHING fun to anybody in the format outside of a few players who will win more games playing Delver / Stoneblade decks. And those wins won't be "fun" except in that they are wins and not losses.

Show and Tell is a broken card in this format but at least it adds something interesting to the format - a viable combo deck that introduces unique lines of play. Say what you want about the fairness of Show and Tell decks, but they do provide combo players an interesting, and singularly unique alternative to Storm combo.

True Name Nemesis just makes Delver and Stoneblade more resilient, and removes choices from deck design for many of these players. It doesn't add anything unique, interesting, or fun.

[joretapo]

Just play control already, imagine all the energy lost complaining instead of building a solution.

[MGB]

Just play control already, imagine all the energy lost complaining instead of building a solution.

That's your solution?

"Take all that money you spent on your favorite deck, and flush it down the toilet. Now go and withdraw $3000 from your bank account and build a Miracles deck that *may* or *may not* even be consistently able to beat a TNN deck - Terminus or bust?"

[dontbiteitholmes]

That's your solution?

"Take all that money you spent on your favorite deck, and flush it down the toilet. Now go and withdraw $3000 from your bank account and build a Miracles deck that *may* or *may not* even be consistently able to beat a TNN deck - Terminus or bust?"

God the tears. How is it to have no vision? Seems pretty bad.

Almost every deck that cares about TNN has a potential answer for it, the rest are just trying to cross the finish line before it's an issue.

This is what MTG comes to when an entire generation can cruise by on just netdecking. Don't worry plebe, someone will come along sooner or later and show you how Red Blasts, Runed Halo, Engineered Plague, Golgari Charm, Zealous Persecution, and about a million other cards still exist.

[MGB]

God the tears. How is it to have no vision? Seems pretty bad.

Almost every deck that cares about TNN has a potential answer for it, the rest are just trying to cross the finish line before it's an issue.

This is what MTG comes to when an entire generation can cruise by on just netdecking. Don't worry plebe, someone will come along sooner or later and show you how Red Blasts, Runed Halo, Engineered Plague, Golgari Charm, Zealous Persecution, and about a million other cards still exist.

Every deck had an "answer" to Survival of the Fittest and Mystical Tutor as well. That doesn't mean they were healthy for the format or added anything positive, and then were rightfully banned.

[mini1337s]

http://i.imgur.com/X4FrLdS.png



Where is the "take 2 aspirin" guy when you need him?

[Shawon]

Every deck had an "answer" to Survival of the Fittest and Mystical Tutor as well. That doesn't mean they were healthy for the format or added anything positive, and then were rightfully banned.

Right, because TNN is on the same tier as cards that enabled fast combo kills... :rolleyes:

[Barook]

Right, because TNN is on the same tier as cards that enabled fast combo kills... :rolleyes:
Mystic Tutor was banned because, according to Wizards, it sucked the fun out of the format and thus, we should be better off without it. That's the essence of the dreaded "Gentleman's Agreement".

If anything, this applies even more to TNN.

[dontbiteitholmes]

Mystic Tutor was banned because, according to Wizards, it sucked the fun out of the format and thus, we should be better off without it. That's the essence of the dreaded "Gentleman's Agreement".

If anything, this applies even more to TNN.

The new gentlemen's agreement is the one where WotC made a new format for people who can't handle the card pool of Legacy and banning is the go to answer for good cards, so go play that.

[Aggro_zombies]

Every deck had an "answer" to Survival of the Fittest and Mystical Tutor as well. That doesn't mean they were healthy for the format or added anything positive, and then were rightfully banned.
There are arguments to be made that neither card was precisely worth banning in the same way that MM or Flash were. Indeed, those arguments were made at the time, at great length. The only compelling reason for both cards to be banned were that they were already-powerful enablers that played important roles in format-dominating decks, which means they're likely to become truly offensive with future printings. Basically, they were insurance policy bans.

TNN doesn't have anywhere near the level of potential that Tutor or Survival had to enable a broken deck, and it doesn't warp the format to anywhere near the degree that MM or Flash did. The closest you could get would be the printing of a bunch of overpowered equipment or auras that turn TNN into a super-fast kill, but even then I doubt we'll ever be on the level of actual, currently-legal combo decks for either speed or not giving a fuck what else is going on in the game.

Also, Survival adding nothing positive? Fight me m8.

[Esper3k]

I miss Survival. My sex life hasn't been the same since the banning. :(

[Megadeus]

I didn't play during survival, but it seems like a super fun card. If Fauna Shaman weren't so slow I'd totally play her

[ESG]

Three weeks isn't enough for me to want a banhammer yet.

You need to play more Legacy then.

[lordofthepit]

You need to play more Legacy then.

See you in about an hour. May or may not be packing some of our favorite creatures. :tongue:

[bjholmes3]

The new gentlemen's agreement is the one where WotC made a new format for people who can't handle the card pool of Legacy and banning is the go to answer for good cards, so go play that.

I love this. Legacy is not the place for people who have the EDH play-weak-crap-but-still-try-to-secretly-win-through-not-"cheap"-"op"-"unfun"-shenanigans "Gentlemen" mindset.

[blindspotxxx]

I just ordered my own playset but I have to agree it is a retarded design. And it just kills so many other archetypes

[bjholmes3]

lol, I could count the number of competitive archetypes "killed" by TNN on one amputated hand.

[mini1337s]

lol, I could count the number of competitive archetypes "killed" by TNN on one amputated hand.
So... 5? ;)

[Megadeus]

So... 5? ;)

Technically it could be any number between 0 and 5 ;)

[dontbiteitholmes]

Every deck had an "answer" to Survival of the Fittest and Mystical Tutor as well. That doesn't mean they were healthy for the format or added anything positive, and then were rightfully banned.

What answer did non-blue decks have to Mystical Tutor?


lol, I could count the number of competitive archetypes "killed" by TNN on one amputated hand.

Yeah that's an interesting point, what decks are now invalidated by TNN that were real decks to begin with?

[Aggro_zombies]

What answer did non-blue decks have to Mystical Tutor?
Lammastide Weave.

[kiblast]

What answer did non-blue decks have to Mystical Tutor?






Surgical Extraction? After all, Mystical Tutor is card disadvantage, while on the other hand Extraction creates some sort of virtual card advantage…

Edit: Do you mean when Tutor was legal? Then I don't have a clue… Extirpate maybe.

Btw before seeing TNN gone, I'd like to see this kind of threads gone from the source.

[dontbiteitholmes]

Edit: Do you mean when Tutor was legal? Then I don't have a clue…

I know

[kiblast]

I know

I see what you did there… well but I guess nobody can argue about that banning… I mean that call was not hard at all it was a no brainer.

[Moa]

Its not banworthy but its poor design. It improved midranged decks which didnt really need help

This is what confuses me the most about the printing of the card. R&D decided to print a legacy playable card so they looked at the format and thought hey you know what could really use a good card midrange blue decks because they could really use some help.

[Dzra]

True-Name Nemesis is ass, but it isn't oppressive yet. If there comes a time when the only way anyone makes top 16 with a creature deck is by playing Nemesis then we can talk about bannings.

[JanoschEausH]

True-Name Nemesis is ass, but it isn't oppressive yet. If there comes a time when the only way anyone makes top 16 with a creature deck is by playing Nemesis then we can talk about bannings.

Which is what actually happened in the last big tournaments since TNN became legal... Decks making Top8 were mostly "Combo", "TNN" or e few exceptions like some DnT lists which are naturally good against TNN...

[Bed Decks Palyer]

I love this. Legacy is not the place for people who have the EDH play-weak-crap-but-still-try-to-secretly-win-through-not-"cheap"-"op"-"unfun"-shenanigans "Gentlemen" mindset.

Except that EDH is play-retarded-crap-but-still-try-to-force-other-people-to-play-weak-crap-that-doesn't-interfere-with-your-"cheap"-"op"-"unfun"-shenanigans. Every time someone tries to win in EDH, he's acting against da spirit of da format.
"Dude, Stone Rain is unfun and overpowered, if you wish to stay part of our community, refrain from using such cheap tactics that's against da spirit, ok? Fine. Now: Tooth and Nail into Kiki-Jiki/Titan."

[Kayradis]

the R&D team threw us a candy.
and here we are complaining about the fact that the card is overpowered and broken.
Isn't that a pre-requesite for a card to reach a playable format in legacy?
Instead of being whiny little bitches and complain about a card that seems to have found is place in a pretty elitist and selective format, let's just find way to beat it!

How could I, a non-blue player, find way to play and beat TNN decks in DC?
Let's just simply put our brains to good use for once.

[Scott]

and here we are complaining about the fact that the card is overpowered and broken.


That's a poor description of the complaints about TNN. And for many, it's a representation of a larger issue. And, many of these people welcome more powerful and interesting cards entering and shaking up the format, and forcing people to use their brains.

[Shawon]

I actually don't want to see this guy gone, even if it is dominant. Any fair (non-combo) card making RUG less popular is welcome by me.

I'd still rather see Delver gone. Fuck that card.

[apple713]

the R&D team threw us a candy.
and here we are complaining about the fact that the card is overpowered and broken.
Isn't that a pre-requesite for a card to reach a playable format in legacy?
Instead of being whiny little bitches and complain about a card that seems to have found is place in a pretty elitist and selective format, let's just find way to beat it!

How could I, a non-blue player, find way to play and beat TNN decks in DC?

Let's just simply put our brains to good use for once.

the candy in this case is a vomit flavored jelly bean. Terrible design and idea. Worst of all its blue.


I actually don't want to see this guy gone, even if it is dominant. Any fair (non-combo) card making RUG less popular is welcome by me.

I'd still rather see Delver gone. Fuck that card.

The issue is that if you want to play aggro now, you are pretty much forced into blue. or i guess you could play DnT or goblins... so really just DnT. Why has blue become one of the best aggro colors, control colors, and combo colors....reallly WOTC? There motto should be "there is no color pie"

[Tormod]

the candy in this case is a vomit flavored jelly bean. Terrible design and idea. Worst of all its blue.

Why are you complaining? You play Show and Tell, don't you just ignore this card?

[Star|Scream]

the candy in this case is a vomit flavored jelly bean. Terrible design and idea. Worst of all its blue.



The issue is that if you want to play aggro now, you are pretty much forced into blue. or i guess you could play DnT or goblins... so really just DnT. Why has blue become one of the best aggro colors, control colors, and combo colors....reallly WOTC? There motto should be "there is no color pie"

The day before TNN became legal, exactly which non-blue "aggro" decks were consistently Tier 1? Aside from goblins and elves, I really don't remember there being any.

[testing32]

The day before TNN became legal, exactly which non-blue "aggro" decks were consistently Tier 1? Aside from goblins and elves, I really don't remember there being any.

People like to think that Maverick, Rock and Jund were/are competitive decks.

[JBlaze]

Dear Green,

Here is Tarmogoyf back, not using him as much these days now that True Name and me are kicking it. Don't get me wrong I love Goyf we had some good times, but dude won't even pitch for a force unless Painter Servant is around. Any way have a good one if you need something countered just let me know.

P.S. Your format has now been assimilated ;)

Love,
Blue

[YamiJoey]

It's not like you can cast it, seeing as how Island has been banned for about a decade. Pshh.

[Gheizen64]

It cement the fact that you should play blue because:

- this crush fair decks
- it's bad against combo, so a blue shell is better for it because blue is still the best color against combo AND
- it's actually blue

I see it as killing a lot of diversity and make the meta UW vs UW mirrors, with some combo on the side.
And as usual, red has not a single way to interact with this barring obliterate effects which are terrible. At least you could double bolt goyf, or block geist. Bah, what a terrible design.

[Esper3k]

And as usual, red has not a single way to interact with this barring obliterate effects which are terrible.

Uhh... REB / Pyroblast?

Skullcrack is actually pretty awesome too.

[Star|Scream]

Uhh... REB / Pyroblast?

Skullcrack is actually pretty awesome too.

For skullcrack to work you have to attack with something with toughness greater than 3 or else it's a one for two (if it resolves at all)

[Tormod]

For skullcrack to work you have to attack with something with toughness greater than 3 or else it's a one for two (if it resolves at all)

This is acceptable because your 3/3 is dead card on the table that doesn't impact the game, so you are actually getting value out of your dead card.

[Star|Scream]

This is acceptable because your 3/3 is dead card on the table that doesn't impact the game, so you are actually getting value out of your dead card.

It's not dead on the table if your opponent is holding up a TNN to block. They should be attacking with it. If they aren't it means they are on the defensive.

What I'm saying is that Skullcrack only works if you are already winning, and only once against that particular opponent. That does not equal Awesome.

[Esper3k]

If they're going to not block your guys out of fear of Skullcrack, I consider that winning.

[Tormod]

It's not dead on the table if your opponent is holding up a TNN to block. They should be attacking with it. If they aren't it means they are on the defensive.

What I'm saying is that Skullcrack only works if you are already winning, and only once against that particular opponent. That does not equal Awesome.

No one said "awesome", I said acceptable.

In most scenarios, TNN has summoning sickness and has an opportunity to block.

if they block, you skull crack and they take 3, if they don't block they take 3. But alteast you added a variable to their decision making.

[UnderwaterGuy]

No one said "awesome", I said acceptable.

In most scenarios, TNN has summoning sickness and has an opportunity to block.

if they block, you skull crack and they take 3, if they don't block they take 3. But alteast you added a variable to their decision making.

esper3k said "awesome"

[Tormod]

esper3k said "awesome"

indeed he did, I'll retract my statement in reference.

but I'll still say it is acceptable for the above reasons. :tongue:

[blacklotus3636]

Dear Green,

Here is Tarmogoyf back, not using him as much these days now that True Name and me are kicking it. Don't get me wrong I love Goyf we had some good times, but dude won't even pitch for a force unless Painter Servant is around. Any way have a good one if you need something countered just let me know.

P.S. Your format has now been assimilated ;)

Love,
Blue

I like this. It also proves how much things have changed. I remember it took about a month or so for people to figure out how nuts goyf was and now, he's been outclassed...by a blue creature. To be honest I didn't think a creature would come along to knock off goyf for most played but wizards succeeded. This is part of the reason why I've been a little nervous about buying foil goyfs for $300-400. I feel fine sinking that kind of money into power because nothing is ever going to come out better than that but with creatures...they just seem to keep getting better and I don't know when it will stop.

[Octopusman]

Is it just me or are some of the negative comments from the gatherer page gone? Mine for sure isn't there anymore and it wasn't report worthy.
Haha, also love how it went from half a star the other day to over 4.
Just seeing the comments really makes it so clear how we're the unimportant minority. At least I was ignorant when I could go to a Legacy event.


I don't mind seeing the format try to adapt and hopefully they print some better answers or cards in any color but reaching critical mass of unblockable & difficult to remove creatures is getting pretty tiring.

I joked with a friend when geist was printed that eventually the only creatures that will be playable will have hexproof (at the minimum apparently) and the only viable removal will be untargeted/sweepers. We're ahead of schedule. I didn't think we'd get there this quickly after geist.

[Teluin]

stuff

check the German version

[UnderwaterGuy]

Is it just me or are some of the negative comments from the gatherer page gone? Mine for sure isn't there anymore and it wasn't report worthy.

What I'm noticing are a lot of negative reviews that are accompanied by 5-star ratings. Maybe wotc really is fucking with this? Why would they care so much though?

"Not a fan of this card, like a even cheaper Invisible Stalker. Boo Wizards! Less like this

Where is the fun in playing against this card? I wouldn't play against anyone rocking a deck with four of these
5/5 stars Posted By: feedbacker (11/13/2013 8:13:50 PM)"

^ look at that one for instance. We're supposed to believe that that guy rated this card a 5/5?

[Bed Decks Palyer]

What I'm noticing are a lot of negative reviews that are accompanied by 5-star ratings. Maybe wotc really is fucking with this? Why would they care so much though?

"Not a fan of this card, like a even cheaper Invisible Stalker. Boo Wizards! Less like this

Where is the fun in playing against this card? I wouldn't play against anyone rocking a deck with four of these
5/5 stars Posted By: feedbacker (11/13/2013 8:13:50 PM)"

^ look at that one for instance. We're supposed to believe that that guy rated this card a 5/5?

Well, maybe the dude was honest in his rating of cards power. Even if you dslike TNN, it's still pretty powerful. Maybe not 5/5 Black Lotus-like powerful, but still good.
Otoh, I thought that ppl also rate how they like the card, not only its power...

[Esper3k]

esper3k said "awesome"


indeed he did, I'll retract my statement in reference.

but I'll still say it is acceptable for the above reasons. :tongue:

Yeah I think Skullcrack is pretty awesome mainly because you get to deal with TNN in a way many people won't see coming. Without an understanding of why Protection saves your creatures in combat, some players let the Skullcrack resolve because it's not as obvious that their TNN is going to die as compared to something like a Golgari Charm or Diabolic Edict. When on the defense, a TNN will also naturally block the biggest attacker, which lends itself to having your Tarmogoyf or Germ tokens crushing a TNN.

[Dzra]

Maybe they'll print a Red Infest/Massacre effect. I could be down with that.

[Lejay]

Is it just me or are some of the negative comments from the gatherer page gone? Mine for sure isn't there anymore and it wasn't report worthy.

Same for me.

[Higgs]

Same for me.

Proper evil, totalitarian regime with changing scores and hiding negative comments and all that :laugh:

[Erdvermampfa]

It's probably the same as here.

[ESG]

Aaron Forsythe discussing True-Name Nemesis on Twitter: "True-Name Nemesis seems to be the talk of the town--maybe we should make a bunch more cards with that mechanic. Or not."

https://twitter.com/mtgaaron/status/403581482871967744

If you're on Twitter, send him your thoughts on the card.


Also, more confirmation that WOTC doesn't test for Legacy, so if something is overpowered, bans are really the only solution:

Jarvis Yu ‏@jkyu06
@mtgaaron @markdash12 "am i correct in assuming you guys never test legacy (?)"

Aaron Forsythe ‏@mtgaaron
@jkyu06 "Correct."

[Tormod]

Oh yes, Give me a Jace or Liliana with protection from player. Some dual lands with protection from player sounds nice too.

:eyebrow:

[Barook]

If you're on Twitter, send him your thoughts on the card.
Done.

I like the suggested tech of changing your name mid-game. :laugh:

[CML]

CML ‏@CMLisawesome 39s
@mtgaaron get maro's weaselly shrewish ass to own up to a failure to understand what "legacy" is, much less design cards for it

[Barook]

CML ‏@CMLisawesome 39s
@mtgaaron get maro's weaselly shrewish ass to own up to a failure to understand what "legacy" is, much less design cards for it
But Maro didn't design TNN.

[ESG]

Also, if you email or tweet WOTC, it goes without saying that your feedback should be respectful and constructive.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

The fact that you pretend that you can't see the difference is bullshit.

Thought experiment: if Wizards printed a card that is totally bonkers and breaks every single format, would you consider the situation completely rectified if they emergency banned the card after the card has been released but before it is officially legal (i.e. during the prerelease period)? Or would you consider it a fuckup of epic proportions?

I would consider it a fuckup, what I wouldn't assume is that it would hurt Wizards' market performance. Traditionally Wizards doesn't get hurt for a card being too good, it gets hurt for a format getting boring over a period of time. That's why they haven't emergency banned anything in the past 13+ years.

[Aggro_zombies]

Also, more confirmation that WOTC doesn't test for Legacy, so if something is overpowered, bans are really the only solution:

Jarvis Yu ‏@jkyu06
@mtgaaron @markdash12 "am i correct in assuming you guys never test legacy (?)"

Aaron Forsythe ‏@mtgaaron
@jkyu06 "Correct."
I'm not sure why this needed to be confirmed. Not only have they stated multiple times before that they don't test for Legacy, it makes no sense for them to spend time testing for Legacy. It's far more important for them to get Standard and Limited right because those two formats see more play than every other official format combined, and if you get them wrong it's going to come back to haunt you pretty quickly. I know Legacy players are shocked - shocked - to discover that their darling isn't very high on Wizards' priority list, but I'm willing to bet you they don't even test much for Modern, Legacy's ostensible replacement format.

I still don't know why people are losing their shit over this card, aside from it being an egregious example of creature power creep. Is it so that if the card ever gets banned, people can crow about being right from the beginning? Do their pet decks lose to it? I don't know. Let's wait three to six months and see if it actually wrecks the format or if its use declines over time. Goblin Lackey, Sensei's Divining Top, and Tarmogoyf didn't wreck the format enough to warrant a ban, despite the many (many) calls for one.

[UnderwaterGuy]

I still don't know why people are losing their shit over this card, aside from it being an egregious example of creature power creep. Is it so that if the card ever gets banned, people can crow about being right from the beginning? Do their pet decks lose to it? I don't know. Let's wait three to six months and see if it actually wrecks the format or if its use declines over time. Goblin Lackey, Sensei's Divining Top, and Tarmogoyf didn't wreck the format enough to warrant a ban, despite the many (many) calls for one.

Have you played with/against it much yet? I don't think that it is a problem because of the fairly high power level. The problem is that it's just boring as hell and makes matchups that previously were interactive (creature decks vs other creature decks) turn into something a lot closer to a dredge matchup where you either draw your narrow hate, or draw more TNN, or lose.

TNN hasn't proven that it is powerful enough for a ban yet and it might never be overpowered since it is so weak vs combo but when this thread's OP is "Would you like to see True-Name Nemesis gone?" my answer is definitely still "yes".

[Gheizen64]

I'm not sure why this needed to be confirmed. Not only have they stated multiple times before that they don't test for Legacy, it makes no sense for them to spend time testing for Legacy. It's far more important for them to get Standard and Limited right because those two formats see more play than every other official format combined, and if you get them wrong it's going to come back to haunt you pretty quickly. I know Legacy players are shocked - shocked - to discover that their darling isn't very high on Wizards' priority list, but I'm willing to bet you they don't even test much for Modern, Legacy's ostensible replacement format.

I still don't know why people are losing their shit over this card, aside from it being an egregious example of creature power creep. Is it so that if the card ever gets banned, people can crow about being right from the beginning? Do their pet decks lose to it? I don't know. Let's wait three to six months and see if it actually wrecks the format or if its use declines over time. Goblin Lackey, Sensei's Divining Top, and Tarmogoyf didn't wreck the format enough to warrant a ban, despite the many (many) calls for one.

Dude seriously, but have you seen matches with this card? It transform previously much more interactive matchups into showdowns of progenitus. It's horrible to watch and horrible to play as and against. It's just stupid.

[Megadeus]

Have you played with/against it much yet? I don't think that it is a problem because of the fairly high power level. The problem is that it's just boring as hell and makes matchups that previously were interactive (creature decks vs other creature decks) turn into something a lot closer to a dredge matchup where you either draw your narrow hate, or draw more TNN, or lose.

TNN hasn't proven that it is powerful enough for a ban yet and it might never be overpowered since it is so weak vs combo but when this thread's OP is "Would you like to see True-Name Nemesis gone?" my answer is definitely still "yes".

This.

[Tormod]

After playing with and against TNN for a few weeks. I kinda like it.

There are fewer Goyf pushes and stalled board states. TNN can take an otherwise slow grindy match up and says "OK boys, the damage race is on"

[Zombie]

Have you played with/against it much yet? I don't think that it is a problem because of the fairly high power level. The problem is that it's just boring as hell and makes matchups that previously were interactive (creature decks vs other creature decks) turn into something a lot closer to a dredge matchup where you either draw your narrow hate, or draw more TNN, or lose.

TNN hasn't proven that it is powerful enough for a ban yet and it might never be overpowered since it is so weak vs combo but when this thread's OP is "Would you like to see True-Name Nemesis gone?" my answer is definitely still "yes".

This.

This.

[YamiJoey]

I still don't know why people are losing their shit over this card, aside from it being an egregious example of creature power creep. Is it so that if the card ever gets banned, people can crow about being right from the beginning? Do their pet decks lose to it? I don't know. Let's wait three to six months and see if it actually wrecks the format or if its use declines over time. Goblin Lackey, Sensei's Divining Top, and Tarmogoyf didn't wreck the format enough to warrant a ban, despite the many (many) calls for one.

Have you played with/against it much yet? I don't think that it is a problem because of the fairly high power level. The problem is that it's just boring as hell and makes matchups that previously were interactive (creature decks vs other creature decks) turn into something a lot closer to a dredge matchup where you either draw your narrow hate, or draw more TNN, or lose.

TNN hasn't proven that it is powerful enough for a ban yet and it might never be overpowered since it is so weak vs combo but when this thread's OP is "Would you like to see True-Name Nemesis gone?" my answer is definitely still "yes".

This.

This.

This.

[Aggro_zombies]

I do not like the card either, but if we're using "it removes interaction and is just generally unlikeable" as a criterion for banning, I'd like to see Tendrils, Grapeshot, High Tide, Show and Tell, Belcher, and Sneak Attack go. Counterbalance too, although that one's less important these days.

If we're not talking about a ban, then I'm not sure what the point of this thread is. There's enough haterade to go around in the other thread, and probably dozens of small anti-TNN fires smoldering in other threads on the site.

[Tormod]

I don't agree with this card is "boring"

I actually think its picks up the pace of the game. When True-Name Hits the table, no more time for durdling, its go time. Like so many things in Legacy, its answer or lose.

Its more "exciting" in that regard.

[UnderwaterGuy]

I don't agree with this card is "boring"

I actually think its picks up the pace of the game. When True-Name Hits the table, no more time for durdling, its go time. Like so many things in Legacy, its answer or lose.

Its more "exciting" in that regard.

It's about as exciting as hearing a judge call "time" and that the current turn is turn zero of turns.

It does mean that the game is going to end soon but not necessarily in an interesting or satisfying way.

I admit there isn't much room for debate between our views though if you really think shorter games with less interaction is a good thing. Personally I like magic games that do go for a looooong time and require a lot of choices from both players. Obviously that's a matter of preference, I know not everyone enjoys that.

[CML]

Also, if you email or tweet WOTC, it goes without saying that your feedback should be respectful and constructive.

i actually think pretending to respect (or, Thassa forbid, somehow actually respecting) WotC communiqués that deserve no respect is one of several things that WotC uses as an excuse to run all over the community, though using replies to thuggish tweets as an excuse to avoid the more substantive criticism, as happened in my case, may amount to the same thing. it is most important that we not backbite but instead join in our loathing of Geist of Saint Trout, and, though I hate Progenifish, I wish we could cut it off at the source too

[Michael Keller]

I've always thought it to be absolutely absurd that they don't test design impact for Eternal Magic. Am I missing something here, or is Eternal not a sanctioned variety of competitive-REL Magic?

I just think that's such a cop-out. Magic has existed for nearly twenty-one years now, and slowly but surely the non-Standard card pool (combined with the pre-8th card pool) will grow and grow. In what parallel universe does it make sense to avoid these formats given that *everything* sooner or later categorizes exclusively into Eternal?

I also believe it's ludicrous to assume that Modern is a de facto replacement for Legacy. If that were the case, given Vintage's already difficult price-barrier, what sense would it make to effectively kill all cards predating 8th? You'd have like ten years' worth of cards effectively illegal to play - unless you play in an already rare sanctioned Vintage event.

[bjholmes3]

Because Progenitus and Geist of Saint Traft are such a major problem in Legacy. Mark my words, a few months from now and TNN will amount to nothing more than an upgraded beater for the 3 or so legit decks that use him, and we'll all accept his purported "bad design" as just another part of Legacy.

[goblinsplayer]

I'd honestly rather get show and tell banned.

[UnderwaterGuy]

I've always thought it to be absolutely absurd that they don't test design impact for Eternal Magic. Am I missing something here, or is Eternal not a sanctioned variety of competitive-REL Magic?

I just think that's such a cop-out. Magic has existed for nearly twenty-one years now, and slowly but surely the non-Standard card pool (combined with the pre-8th card pool) will grow and grow. In what parallel universe does it make sense to avoid these formats given that *everything* sooner or later categorizes exclusively into Eternal?

I also believe it's ludicrous to assume that Modern is a de facto replacement for Legacy. If that were the case, given Vintage's already difficult price-barrier, what sense would it make to effectively kill all cards predating 8th? You'd have like ten years' worth of cards effectively illegal to play - unless you play in an already rare sanctioned Vintage event.

Yeah but they get to save by not hiring one additional employee to do that work, or more likely just having one person spend a couple hours for each new set to make sure new cards aren't retarded in old formats.

[Lord Seth]

I've always thought it to be absolutely absurd that they don't test design impact for Eternal Magic. Am I missing something here, or is Eternal not a sanctioned variety of competitive-REL Magic?

I just think that's such a cop-out. Magic has existed for nearly twenty-one years now, and slowly but surely the non-Standard card pool (combined with the pre-8th card pool) will grow and grow. In what parallel universe does it make sense to avoid these formats given that *everything* sooner or later categorizes exclusively into Eternal?Because those formats are by their very nature quite difficult to test for due to having a significantly larger card pool than Standard. And, as you just noted, they grow and grow, making it successively harder to do any kind of actual testing for it.

[ivanpei]

Because Progenitus and Geist of Saint Traft are such a major problem in Legacy. Mark my words, a few months from now and TNN will amount to nothing more than an upgraded beater for the 3 or so legit decks that use him, and we'll all accept his purported "bad design" as just another part of Legacy.

Yea I support this. It's just a beater. The format will adapt, and it won't be as good anymore, but will still see play in a few decks. I still think it's not as stupid as Delver, which is far more broken.

[HammafistRoob]

I agree with Hollywood 100 percent. Who are these people who test for limited and Standard and how much do they get paid? I'd gladly test Vintage, Modern, and Legacy all day for like 10 bucks an hour. Just give me one more competent player to test with and call it a day.

[ESG]

I'm with Hollywood. WOTC honestly should consider Eternal when designing cards. I don't expect them to go deep, but they should do a little bit of testing, especially when they have a card that they think might be pushed a little too much.

I know a number of people who work for WOTC, and they're fantastic players and smart people, so it blows my mind that something like Enter the Infinite could be printed right after Omniscience. Even if you aren't that knowledgeable about Magic, it really doesn't make sense to print a card that lets you play any spell for free and then print a card that lets you draw your deck.

Also, it really wouldn't take much time to mull those things over. The vast majority of the cards from each new set are unplayable in Legacy, so you're looking at less than 10 cards from each set that you might need to test, and those would usually be the same cards that end up getting early chatter on this site and others. Anything that looks broken -- a flying, lifelink Yawgmoth's Bargain, for example -- ought to be sufficiently tested before it's released into the wild.

[YamiJoey]

Funny, because Enter the Infinite definitely falls under every category of 'Unplayable in legacy' as far as I can tell. How many people were playing non-permanents that cost more than about 4 until then? Also Omniscience wasn't exactly 'known technology' until Enter happened. And it's not like it broke the format. Sneak is still putting up better results.

[Dzra]

Because those formats are by their very nature quite difficult to test for due to having a significantly larger card pool than Standard. And, as you just noted, they grow and grow, making it successively harder to do any kind of actual testing for it.

I'm not really on the "test for eternal" boat, but really I don't think it takes a staggering genius to look through a set and determine which half a dozen cards are even remotely Eternal playable. Once you figure that out, it's simple to do a minimal amount of testing using the current meta as a starting place. Just about anyone who is very familiar with the format could do this, and there are quite a lot of us.

Honestly, it would have taken anyone familiar with Legacy about 5 min to look at the latest commander release and realize that out of the 3 or so potentials, True-Name Nemesis stands out as being too uninteractive, and maybe we can change/add some text to fix this. You want him to be Hexproof? Fine. You want him to be unblockable? Fine. But is there a good reason why he can't be damaged? ... maybe? Is there a good reason why his ability can't be Stifled? Hmm. Is there a good reason why his ability doesn't even target a player? Uhhhh. Can we at least give this guy some flavor text so I can interact with him on an emotional level?

Anyways, I'm not even saying that they should test, just that it wouldn't be that backbreaking for them. Really, I'd be perfectly happy if they never gave Legacy a single minute worth of testing if they'd actually support the format.

[Bed Decks Palyer]

Personally I like magic games that do go for a looooong time...
This is what I never understood.
I also like interesting and thrilling games, but for me it really doesn't matter that they must last for fifty minutes. My parents do not limit me how many games may I play, so if one game is over fast, I may play another one.
Also, most of the long games are about spinning Top, obsessive rearranging of lands and of course, about the Kibler shuffle. Meh.

[danyul]

Honestly, it would have taken anyone familiar with Legacy about 5 min to look at the latest commander release and realize that out of the 3 or so potentials, True-Name Nemesis stands out as being too uninteractive, and maybe we can change/add some text to fix this. You want him to be Hexproof? Fine. You want him to be unblockable? Fine. But is there a good reason why he can't be damaged? ... maybe? Is there a good reason why his ability can't be Stifled? Hmm. Is there a good reason why his ability doesn't even target a player? Uhhhh. Can we at least give this guy some flavor text so I can interact with him on an emotional level?

LOL. TNN is so uninteractive that you can't even target him with your feelings.

[Purgatory]

LOL. TNN is so uninteractive that you can't even target him with your feelings.

This, contrary to TNN, made me happy.

[clavio]

Playing against TNN is way more fun than getting counter/topped out of a game ever was.

[ESG]

Also Omniscience wasn't exactly 'known technology' until Enter happened. And it's not like it broke the format. Sneak is still putting up better results.

Prior to Enter the Infinite's printing, Omniscience was played in the Show and Tell build that ran Burning Wish instead of Sneak Attack. Part of the problem of Show and Tell is that there are so many versions of the deck. The card did not used to be very powerful, but then WOTC decided to start printing absurd permanents like Emrakul, Griselbrand, and Omniscience. Show and Tell is only as broken as what you can cheat in. Unfortunately, WOTC continues to up the ante on that. I can see two possibilities: One is that Show and Tell will never be banned because enough people choose to play tempo decks that its tournament dominance will never quite be obvious; the other is that WOTC will decide to print a series of permanents that say, effectively, "When this enters the battlefield, you win the game."

[Esper3k]

If a deck's dominance of a meta isn't obvious, then one could say it's not actually dominant.

[TheKingslayer]

Playing against TNN is way more fun than getting counter/topped out of a game ever was.

I feel that Deathrite and Abrupt decay were great technologies to add to the format. Abrupt decay offers versatile removal (that is highly maindeckable) that can get rid of CBalance. As well, we formerly had K. Grip, and Green Sun'z Zenith to circumvent it. Also, not to mention that Counterbalance can be snared, pierced, swan songed, while the most efficient removal for TNN on the stack is Pyroblast.

[Barook]

I've always thought it to be absolutely absurd that they don't test design impact for Eternal Magic. Am I missing something here, or is Eternal not a sanctioned variety of competitive-REL Magic?

I just think that's such a cop-out. Magic has existed for nearly twenty-one years now, and slowly but surely the non-Standard card pool (combined with the pre-8th card pool) will grow and grow. In what parallel universe does it make sense to avoid these formats given that *everything* sooner or later categorizes exclusively into Eternal?

I also believe it's ludicrous to assume that Modern is a de facto replacement for Legacy. If that were the case, given Vintage's already difficult price-barrier, what sense would it make to effectively kill all cards predating 8th? You'd have like ten years' worth of cards effectively illegal to play - unless you play in an already rare sanctioned Vintage event.
http://www.wizards.com/magic/magazine/article.aspx?x=mtg/daily/ld/269

One the one hand, they design Commander cards with Eternal in mind, but on the other hand, they do not test the cards? :eyebrow:

Is it really too much to ask test the few chosen cards that aren't Commander crap to playtest them a few games?

[Dzra]

while the most efficient removal for TNN on the stack is Pyroblast.

Hit them for 20 style points.

http://magiccards.info/scans/en/lg/72.jpg.

[JBlaze]

Saying "we don't test for eternal" is such a cop-out. It takes absolutely no testing whatsoever to see that some of these cards are just insane.

[dontbiteitholmes]

I've always thought it to be absolutely absurd that they don't test design impact for Eternal Magic. Am I missing something here, or is Eternal not a sanctioned variety of competitive-REL Magic?

I just think that's such a cop-out. Magic has existed for nearly twenty-one years now, and slowly but surely the non-Standard card pool (combined with the pre-8th card pool) will grow and grow. In what parallel universe does it make sense to avoid these formats given that *everything* sooner or later categorizes exclusively into Eternal?

I also believe it's ludicrous to assume that Modern is a de facto replacement for Legacy. If that were the case, given Vintage's already difficult price-barrier, what sense would it make to effectively kill all cards predating 8th? You'd have like ten years' worth of cards effectively illegal to play - unless you play in an already rare sanctioned Vintage event.

Implying one person can do the job that almost half this forum put together can't handle (http://www.mtgthesource.com/forums/showthread.php?23527-TimeWalk-2-0-Stillbirth).

Implying WotC has released more than one card in the past 10 years that needed to be banned in Legacy.

Implying WotC cares if they Mental Misstep once every 12 blocks or so.

Implying giving any single person the power to basically preemptively ban cards (by not printing them) is anywhere close to a good idea.

Implying the format would be better right now if WotC had been doing this for the past 10 years.

Don't ask WotC to test for Eternal. Only thousands and thousands of combined eternal players can test for eternal. If something is oppressive it can always be banned but I don't want any one person, or even group of 10 people, to make that decision.

[Bed Decks Palyer]

Implying giving any single person the power to basically preemptively ban cards (by not printing them) is anywhere close to a good idea.



As much as you might be right on your other points, this one is strange. There's already someone who pre-emptively bans the card right now. It's called R&D and just becasue they are more than one person doens't mena nay difference in result. Also, preempitvely preban-antiprint Disco inferno is good idea.

[Jeff]

If a deck's dominance of a meta isn't obvious, then one could say it's not actually dominant.

Show and Tell isn't format dominating, it's format defining. Sure, it doesn't win every tournament, because it IS beatable, but that single card dramatically affects what decks can be played in the format in a way not other card does.

If you don't think that's a problem, fine, but the problem with show and tell has never been and never will be dominance, it's always going to be it's defining effect on the format.

[UnderwaterGuy]

Show and Tell isn't format dominating, it's format defining. Sure, it doesn't win every tournament, because it IS beatable, but that single card dramatically affects what decks can be played in the format in a way not other card does.

If you don't think that's a problem, fine, but the problem with show and tell has never been and never will be dominance, it's always going to be it's defining effect on the format.

Show and Tell is the engine for some of the best combo decks. If you banned it then other combo decks would pick up as much slack as they could and I believe the end result would be that combo in general becomes weaker and less represented. Currently people choose their combo-interactive cards to deal with S&T, Storm, and potentially rogue combos. Without S&T they will have more slots for Storm/Elves/rogue stuff and those decks become harder to win with.

Combo decks are not dominant at all right now though. We have a pretty decent mix of the big three archetypes with control being the least represented. Removing S&T doesn't allow for any new decks to become playable, it just kills ~2 current decks so that Storm becomes the only top-tier combo deck. That removes diversity.

What deck is it that you think S&T is keeping out of legacy? The only deck(s) I can think of that it invalidates are inferior combos. If what you want to do is play a deck built around some weaker combo then I don't think it's fair for you to say no one should be allowed to play with their S&T combo of preference.

[Jeff]

First, recognize that I'm coming from this position as a combo player. I just played ANT at GP DC.


What deck is it that you think S&T is keeping out of legacy? The only deck(s) I can think of that it invalidates are inferior combos. If what you want to do is play a deck built around some weaker combo then I don't think it's fair for you to say no one should be allowed to play with their S&T combo of preference.

Creature decks that aren't backed up with discard or countermagic. The closest thing we have to an aggro deck in the format is Jund or RUG, and that's disappointing. Either Zoo or Maverick should be able to exist as a deck. Historically those decks have had a negative matchup against combo, obviously, but they've had some tools. As the combo decks have gotten better and faster, the hatebears have gotten better too. The problem is that the best non blue or black hate bears, while viable against most combo decks, don't do anything reliably against Show and Tell. Thalia, Gaddock Teeg, Ethersworn Canonist, these cards have to have everything go right for the creature player in order for them to be particularly relevant. It's a combo that, because of it's flexibility, cannot be effectively sideboarded for. The only way to beat it with a creature deck is to go all out and build your deck around beating it, which is essentially what Death and Taxes is.

If Show and Tell were banned, those decks that simply don't exist at all now would come back as decks that simply have a bad combo matchup. They wouldn't suddenly dominate storm or reanimator, but they would have a much better winning percentage against those decks than they do against S&T.

Now, if WotC doesn't want to ban Show and Tell, I suppose you could print some better hate bears. I'm sure you could do a white or green hate bear that said something like "Permanents cannot enter the battlefield unless they are cast from a players hand". If they didn't want a negative interaction with fetchlands, they could go with Non-Land permanents, or maybe hating on fetches could be interesting as well.

Beyond all that, which is my primary reason for thinking the card is format defining, having a combo deck that consistent and fast in the format stifles creativity. As recently as 2 years ago, random brews could top 8 or even win a star city open. Now the speed and interaction of the format is legitimately shrinking the available card pool. You really need to build with Delver of Deathrite if you're playing a creature deck. That's not objectively bad, but in my subjective opinion I miss the actual diversity we had in the format back when you could face 9 totally different archetypes in a SCG open, now it's just 4 delver decks and 2 deathrite decks and 3 show and tell decks. Whee! Obviously the decks I'm saying I miss here aren't great decks, they aren't pillars of the format or anything, but my personal preference is to play in a format where (pulling numbers out of my ass) the dominant decks take up ~70% of the format and there's 30% or semi-viable random things instead of a format where the dominant strategies take up 85-90% of the field. I'd recommend banning show and tell based on my initial argument, not this one, this is just a fringe benefit of what I think would happen if it were banned.

TL;DR: Show and Tell is the combo deck that creature decks have the least ability to sideboard against. Other combo decks can be sideboarded for by non-blue and non-black decks, but not show and tell, and that's why the card is format defining.

[snorlaxcom]

Never seen this card played so I never knew it was here. Only time I saw it was when it was pitched to force.

[UnderwaterGuy]

First, recognize that I'm coming from this position as a combo player. I just played ANT at GP DC.

Creature decks that aren't backed up with discard or countermagic.

Like Death and Taxes? That deck is not built specifically to beat S&T, why is it so hard for some people to accept it as a good deck. I think S&T in particular has tons of permanents that people have used as sideboard cards or metagame maindeck choices. We've all seen the hilarious plays where the non-S&T player reveals their card and it completely screws the Show and Tell player. imo it wouldn't make any sense for whichever non-blue non-black aggro decks you are talking about (I assume you mean Goblins) to have an awesome combo matchup. Who cares if that deck has weaker sideboard plan for S&T? They have their own gameplan to worry about and they have their own matchups that favor them.

I don't think it's a bad thing to expect all decks to either race combo or play some cards that interact with combo. Not every matchup should be 50/50 and fast combo decks beating creature-based aggressive decks is normal and expected.

[Jeff]

The problem isn't that there aren't any answers that can beat show and tell, it's that there's no single hate card for the diversity of Show and Tell. Sure, when the show and tell player puts in Emrakul and you put in Sower of Temptation, that's awesome, but when they put in Omniscience and you put in Sower, it sucks. Just last week I put in Humility and my opponent put in Hive Mind. Remember when Goblins used to sideboard Angel of Despair just to beat show and tell? And how they stopped because even that wasn't doing it? I've watched show and tell put in omniscience, the opponent put in Angel of Despair, and then the S&T player cunning wished for trickbind and won anyway.

The only way Death and Taxes is able to beat S&T is because they essentially have a 15 card sideboard against the deck in the main. You can fight Show and Tell with cards like Managara and Karakas, Sneak Attack with Phyrexian Revoker, and all the cantrips with Thalia. It takes an overwhelming hate bear deck to make that matchup even remotely winnable. D&T isn't an aggro deck, it's a prison deck.

My point is that there's an entire class of aggro decks whose interaction is solely with your life total that has been completely eliminated from the format. Maverick, Zoo, Burn, and to some extent Goblins. This entire theater of decks has been removed from the metagame, and I think the metagame is worse for it. Yes, combo decks should beat fast aggro decks. It's important to keep aggro decks from taking over the format that combo be favored in the matchup. However, when the combo decks force the aggro decks out of the format entirely, I personally consider that a bad thing. We had a healthy and interesting format when Zoo was trying to race Storm, and sometimes accomplishing that, but now the Zoo decks just don't have a chance. The pendulum has swung too far in the combo players direction, and the tempo and midrange decks in the format are giving us the illusion of a diverse metagame when it's really just delver vs deathrite vs show and tell.

When Pat Cox and Kenny Mayer give up on Zoo, that should tell you something :)

[IsThisACatInAHat?]

When Pat Cox and Kenny Mayer give up on Zoo, that should tell you something :)
Who the hell cares?

At risk of you writing me a novel, no player should have the option to ignore opposing interaction altogether by nature of their deck choice. Zoo is a less interactive deck than Tendrils or Show & Tell. Both combo decks care about what their opponent is doing, or they wouldn't play 7-8 maindeck protection spells with half a board dedicated to antihate. Zoo is the 75 best burn and dorks in MtG.

More importantly, this thread is about TNN.

[Barook]

Maverick, Zoo, Burn, and to some extent Goblins.
But Maverick has ways to deal with S&T decks. Its problems are bad match-ups in Jund, BUG Shardless, Storm Combo (at least on the draw), Elves and good ol' Miracles beating the shit out of creature decks. As long as Miracles is a DTB, creature beatdown decks without discard or counters are pretty much boned. As you said - D&T is a creature-based control, not an aggro deck.

Pure aggro decks are pretty much dead because

a) combo in its current form is too fast to race reliably and
b) Super-Wrath of Gods for :w: is a thing.

S&T would be a minor offender at best. And I'm still waiting for a red-based hatebear that nukes a player for the highest converted manacost of permanents they control. A flying spagetti monster would be significantly less impressive if they took 15 to the face.

[TheKingslayer]

Hit them for 20 style points.

http://magiccards.info/scans/en/lg/72.jpg.

Hahahaha I would love to cast that in Legacy just to see the look on my opponent's face.

[UnderwaterGuy]

The problem isn't that there aren't any answers that can beat show and tell, it's that there's no single hate card for the diversity of Show and Tell. Sure, when the show and tell player puts in Emrakul and you put in Sower of Temptation, that's awesome, but when they put in Omniscience and you put in Sower, it sucks.

Would you understand my argument if I said that that is an important part of what I like about combo like Show and Tell? Having multiple lines with the card is what makes it interesting and playing cards that answer only some of those S&T plays is what makes choice important in deck building/sideboarding/playing.

It's like playing against the Griselbrand/Oath/S&T decks in vintage. Sideboarding to hate out their plan is really hard because they have ways around basically any of your hate cards. But I wouldn't want it any other way because it means that our decisions matter and it makes the match more skill intensive or at the very least more interesting and fun and that's what I really want from a game. S&T in legacy works the same way; having one binary hate card that wrecks your opponent's game plan is boring as hell. S&T hate cards do exist in many forms, there just isn't one that works in 100% of cases.



My point is that there's an entire class of aggro decks whose interaction is solely with your life total that has been completely eliminated from the format. Maverick, Zoo, Burn, and to some extent Goblins. This entire theater of decks has been removed from the metagame, and I think the metagame is worse for it. Yes, combo decks should beat fast aggro decks. It's important to keep aggro decks from taking over the format that combo be favored in the matchup. However, when the combo decks force the aggro decks out of the format entirely, I personally consider that a bad thing.

Well I think the truth is that those kind of simple aggro decks just are not good enough. Aggro exists in the form of Tempo now and Threshold has proven its incredible resilience in ways that old aggro decks like zoo and goblins never could. Those decks just are not interactive enough to cut it nowadays and I think some of that needs to be attributed to the growth of Legacy's playerbase. I would argue that the format has never been closer to being "solved" than it has been in the past year or two and if we had this many people playing and building legacy decks years and years ago that Zoo may have stopped being a viable deck even earlier.

You definitely make an important point when you say that Zoo could have raced a storm deck in the past. I don't believe that Storm has gotten much faster since then though and that indicates (imo) that Combo is not what's keeping Zoo-aggro out of the top tier of decks. Surely the rise of midrange decks (and creatures such as TRUE NAME NEMESIS, oh my god it's almost as if I managed to get this post on-topic, not really though) has had more of a stifling effect on low-cmc animal beatdown.

edit: apologies for getting so incredibly off topic

[Lord Seth]

Show and Tell is the engine for some of the best combo decks. If you banned it then other combo decks would pick up as much slack as they could and I believe the end result would be that combo in general becomes weaker and less represented. Currently people choose their combo-interactive cards to deal with S&T, Storm, and potentially rogue combos. Without S&T they will have more slots for Storm/Elves/rogue stuff and those decks become harder to win with.

Combo decks are not dominant at all right now though. We have a pretty decent mix of the big three archetypes with control being the least represented. Removing S&T doesn't allow for any new decks to become playable, it just kills ~2 current decks so that Storm becomes the only top-tier combo deck. That removes diversity.

What deck is it that you think S&T is keeping out of legacy? The only deck(s) I can think of that it invalidates are inferior combos. If what you want to do is play a deck built around some weaker combo then I don't think it's fair for you to say no one should be allowed to play with their S&T combo of preference.
This is an important thing to remember. It's easy to say "this card/deck is really powerful and because other decks aren't as good, it's keeping them out." But you have to stop and ask yourself, is it really that card/deck doing it, or is it just because those other decks aren't that good, period?

I mean, that was part of the rationale for the banning of Wild Nacatl in Modern. Supposedly it was such a goshdarn great card for aggro that there wasn't a reason to play any aggro deck without it. So it got banned, and... well, still waiting on all those other aggro decks to be good. Affinity is Tier 1, but it was decent even before the Wild Nacatl ban. Turns out, the decks that Wild Nacatl was supposedly keeping out weren't that great to begin with. Considering how much Legacy players make fun of the Wild Nacatl ban, I find it amusing for them to turn around and then ask the same sort of thing be done to Legacy.

[Koby]

I don't get all this hype about TNN. I played against it twice last nite, and won two matches 2-0 and 2-1. I think I killed like 3 TNNs between Golgari Charm and Liliana of the Veil.

[nedleeds]

I don't get all this hype about TNN. I played against it twice last nite, and won two matches 2-0 and 2-1. I think I killed like 3 TNNs between Golgari Charm and Liliana of the Veil.

I sided it out vs. combo 3 times yesterday. It was good vs. Jund but only because my opponent was retarded. I put it behind clique and trygon predator ... predator was beast mode.

[Bed Decks Palyer]

I don't get all this hype about TNN. I played against it twice last nite, and won two matches 2-0 and 2-1. I think I killed like 3 TNNs between Golgari Charm and Liliana of the Veil.

But you cannot kill Show and Tell with Golgari Charm!
*popcorn*

[Admiral_Arzar]

Pure aggro decks are pretty much dead because

a) combo in its current form is too fast to race reliably and
b) Super-Wrath of Gods for :w: is a thing.

S&T would be a minor offender at best. And I'm still waiting for a red-based hatebear that nukes a player for the highest converted manacost of permanents they control. A flying spagetti monster would be significantly less impressive if they took 15 to the face.

As a fast zoo zealot who worships at the altar of Price of Progress, I feel I should address this point. I played what was basically Goyfsligh for an extended period in Legacy and did extremely well with it, including beating up combo (I had an undefeated record against storm, for example). However, that was Pre-Avacyn Restored. That set introduced Terminus and the Legacy Miracles deck, which is possibly the most miserable non-combo matchup for Zoo imaginable. Getting Wrathed for :w: at instant speed is both back-breaking and demoralizing, and it comes from the same deck that packs CB/Top and often Energy Field/RIP and/or Leyline of Sanctity, all of which shut off your "burn them out" backup plan. So I agree on that point.

However, the second problem was/is Griselbrand. Sneak and Show was always a scary matchup, but giving the deck the ability to drop a 7/7 lifelinker into play randomly made it even worse. It was sometimes possible to win past a blocking Emrakul or Progenitus - Griselbrand makes this damn near impossible. The proliferation of Sneak and Show as a result of this printing is problematic as (as was mentioned earlier) most traditional hate that Zoo can field against its usual arch-foes (Storm, Dredge, ReAnimator, Spiral Tide) doesn't do much against Sneak. The problem was compounded with the printing of Omnicience/Enter as these decks often avoid the occasional blowouts you could get with narrow hate against Sneak (they ignore Karakas, Gilded Drake, and Pithing Needle and can answer things like Angel of Despair easily). These decks are not only hate-resistant but also avoid the life dependency that Storm has, and are faster than Spiral Tide.

I tried to resurrect fast Zoo early this year, but faced with multiple Omnitell and Sneak players along with multiple Miracles players I was auto-losing half my matches or more simply due to those matchups. To (finally) get back on topic, the presence of TNN is simply another nail in a coffin that is already locked up pretty tightly. Not only is it a wall against Zoo, but it improves decks that were already hard matchups (Stoneblade with Mystic, Supreme Verdict, and Snapcaster + STP was rough to begin with). Lastly, it bends the meta in favor of both Terminus.dec and SnT-based fast combo which ignores most hate and isn't life-dependent. Both of these decks crush you, and the TNN-based midrange decks aren't exactly easy either. There are precious few good matchups for Zoo or any other aggro deck in today's meta.

[Dzra]

There are precious few good matchups for Zoo or any other aggro deck in today's meta.

In a format as efficient as Legacy, I'm not sure there is a good reason to stick to a pure aggro strategy like Zoo. Creature decks like Goblins and Death and Taxes can afford to fill their deck with mana denial. Merfolk and Delver decks can fill theirs with taxing countermagic, the latter's efficiency is so good that it can afford to run a lot of countermagic. The slight speed boost that Zoo has over these decks is just not enough to warrant skipping out on the various points of interaction that you'll be missing out on.

For a Zoo deck to be good, it would have to be far faster and much more consistent than its hybrid counterparts. Even then, it's far more likely that any new, efficient cards that might be good in Zoo will instead be incorporated into a hybrid strategy. The best way to prevent that from happening is to make efficient, aggressive-oriented cards with very strict color requirements. Think Wild Nacatl or a Deathrite Shaman but in Zoo colors. Imagine a Granger Guildmage that was actually really good. It'd be tough to do, and if you get it wrong then you'll likely just be adding another efficient beater to the tempo arsenal.

Sorry, that was a bit off topic. True-Name Nemesis sucks. :)

[ajfennewald]

In a format as efficient as Legacy, I'm not sure there is a good reason to stick to a pure aggro strategy like Zoo. Creature decks like Goblins and Death and Taxes can afford to fill their deck with mana denial. Merfolk and Delver decks can fill theirs with taxing countermagic, the latter's efficiency is so good that it can afford to run a lot of countermagic. The slight speed boost that Zoo has over these decks is just not enough to warrant skipping out on the various points of interaction that you'll be missing out on.

For a Zoo deck to be good, it would have to be far faster and much more consistent than its hybrid counterparts. Even then, it's far more likely that any new, efficient cards that might be good in Zoo will instead be incorporated into a hybrid strategy. The best way to prevent that from happening is to make efficient, aggressive-oriented cards with very strict color requirements. Think Wild Nacatl or a Deathrite Shaman but in Zoo colors. Imagine a Granger Guildmage that was actually really good. It'd be tough to do, and if you get it wrong then you'll likely just be adding another efficient beater to the tempo arsenal.

Sorry, that was a bit off topic. True-Name Nemesis sucks. :)

There are alot of things going against zoo at the moment for sure. That said if there were two more one drops on the level of nacatl it would be good again I think. As others have said it was really the increase in effeciency of control that killed zoo but ramping up the effeiciwency of zoo would somewhat counter this. If you are as much of a wild nacatl fanatic as me I think the best way to play it is in a 4 color delver deck. I don't think the deck is better than the other delver decks but it is better than naya zoo in the current meta. Also true name is stupid.

[ironclad8690]

To all the people who said that TNN would kill RUG, check out the legacy decks that have been doing well since TNN was released:

http://tcdecks.net/metagame.php?format=Legacy&fecha=2013-11

RUG delver's best month by a LOOOOONNNNGshot

[Patrunkenphat7]

I really wish they hadn't printed this card (or if they had it should have been white), but it absolutely should not get banned at this point. I don't think it's even in the top 5 most bannable cards in Legacy.

[kiblast]

White Nemesis would have been as bad as blue imho. Imagine 4 White Nemesis in Death and Taxes. With 4 Aether Vials and 3 Cavern of Souls, as well as 4 Stoneforge Mystic to fetch your equipment.

[lordofthepit]

The problem isn't that there aren't any answers that can beat show and tell, it's that there's no single hate card for the diversity of Show and Tell. Sure, when the show and tell player puts in Emrakul and you put in Sower of Temptation, that's awesome, but when they put in Omniscience and you put in Sower, it sucks. Just last week I put in Humility and my opponent put in Hive Mind. Remember when Goblins used to sideboard Angel of Despair just to beat show and tell? And how they stopped because even that wasn't doing it? I've watched show and tell put in omniscience, the opponent put in Angel of Despair, and then the S&T player cunning wished for trickbind and won anyway.

The only way Death and Taxes is able to beat S&T is because they essentially have a 15 card sideboard against the deck in the main. You can fight Show and Tell with cards like Managara and Karakas, Sneak Attack with Phyrexian Revoker, and all the cantrips with Thalia. It takes an overwhelming hate bear deck to make that matchup even remotely winnable. D&T isn't an aggro deck, it's a prison deck.

My point is that there's an entire class of aggro decks whose interaction is solely with your life total that has been completely eliminated from the format. Maverick, Zoo, Burn, and to some extent Goblins. This entire theater of decks has been removed from the metagame, and I think the metagame is worse for it. Yes, combo decks should beat fast aggro decks. It's important to keep aggro decks from taking over the format that combo be favored in the matchup. However, when the combo decks force the aggro decks out of the format entirely, I personally consider that a bad thing. We had a healthy and interesting format when Zoo was trying to race Storm, and sometimes accomplishing that, but now the Zoo decks just don't have a chance. The pendulum has swung too far in the combo players direction, and the tempo and midrange decks in the format are giving us the illusion of a diverse metagame when it's really just delver vs deathrite vs show and tell.

When Pat Cox and Kenny Mayer give up on Zoo, that should tell you something :)

I'd like to offer some comments as a Zoo player.

I've been playing Zoo for a long time, and I've jammed it in fields full of Survival of the Fittest, Natural Order, Show and Tell, Lion's Eye Diamond, Mental Misstep, Stoneforge Mystic, and Terminus to reasonable success. Of course, I've had to tweak my deck at each point to adjust to the new metagame, and it's not the only deck I play (I've played roughly 20% of my sanctioned matches with Zoo since the start of 2011, a figure that has steadily decreased the more recently you look). However, when I've tweaked it to the point where I feel it's a reasonable choice in the meta, I will play the deck, even in large ones with lots at stake, fully expecting to do well. The most recent Zoo lists look dramatically from the ones that were dominating the format four years ago, and I suspect that the reason Zoo has generally been considered dead is because players refused to adapt.

I have considered possible changes I want to make to combat a True-Name Nemesis metagame, but I decided that it was best just to play my own True-Name Nemesis decks for now. Or play combo to go over the top. Or play Miracles to sweep the board. Or Imperial Painter to just blast the fuck out of all the blue decks and to punish greedy mana bases. But certainly not Zoo.

What's really frustrating about True-Name Nemesis from a Zoo perspective is that it turns the deck's best strength--a plethora of removal for creatures and artifacts/enchantments--into a liability. The deck literally has many more answers to a resolved Show and Tell than it does to True-Name Nemesis (Knight of the Reliquary, Karakas, Oblivion Ring, Ethersworn Canonist, Qasali Pridemage, Gaddock Teeg, etc., depending on what you're playing against). When your opponent casts Show and Tell, he's probably blown his load if you have an answer, and if he dropped a fatty that you have no answer for, you can still try to race. That's actually a better situation than racing a 3-mana creature that serves as a Maze of Ith + The Abyss which will eventually strap on a piece of equipment to dominate the game, since unlike combo decks, TNN decks are also backed up by plenty of removal to make combat difficult.

I don't want to focus exclusively on the Zoo perspective though--I love the Legacy format, I have access to almost any deck, and I feel comfortable piloting many of them. I don't think True-Name Nemesis should be banned (yet) because I'm one of those people who thinks a card shouldn't be banned until it actually proves to be degenerate. If Zoo perishes as an archetype because of metagame forces, then so be it: decks need to adapt to the format. But that being said, I don't see how True-Name Nemesis adds anything meaningful to the format at all, and this is a sentiment echoed by players that identify with a wide range of archetypes.

[ESG]

I don't think True-Name Nemesis should be banned (yet) because I'm one of those people who thinks a card shouldn't be banned until it actually proves to be degenerate.

The card was born degenerate. Protection from a player is an absolutely ridiculous ability that should not exist. Bans happen for all sorts of reasons. People forget that tournament dominance is only one reason to ban a card.



To all the people who said that TNN would kill RUG, check out the legacy decks that have been doing well since TNN was released:

http://tcdecks.net/metagame.php?format=Legacy&fecha=2013-11

RUG delver's best month by a LOOOOONNNNGshot

How is this at all surprising? The forecast was that True-Name Nemesis will push the format more toward combo decks (since those kill the opponent before TNN becomes relevant). RUG Delver is the premier anti-combo deck, so a field full of combo decks will be good for RUG. Also, this overlooks the fact that some RUG decks play TNN!

[Patrunkenphat7]

White Nemesis would have been as bad as blue imho. Imagine 4 White Nemesis in Death and Taxes. With 4 Aether Vials and 3 Cavern of Souls, as well as 4 Stoneforge Mystic to fetch your equipment.

Yes that would be insanely good, but right now you just slam it into most blue decks. I like cards that go well in Death and Taxes because that deck will never be TOO dominant even though it is very good for a variety of reasons.

[thecrav]

I'm just gonna come out and say what we've all been thinking this whole time.

True Name Nemesis is an Illuminati plot to make non-blue aggro unviable.

[Rabbi]

"Protection from player" is like a joke ability from Unglued. Ban this crap from legacy asap.

[T-101]

I don't like the card, and I think wizards should have thought more about it before printing as is.

However, this is Legacy. We adapt, we evolve. I'm willing to give this card a few months before I cry for anything like a ban. There are answers, we should start playing them more, or play the card ourselves.

[davelin]

Remember when people said M14, Theros and DGM didnt have any true legacy staples? Be careful what you wish for...

[Rood]

Rabbi hit this thread on the head.

[jimmythegreek]

Im gonna play tnn in my goblin deck with four stoneforge mystics that way creature based decks will be viable again.

[Tormod]

Unban Wild Nactl!

Huh? you mean this bitchfest isn't about Modern?

(seriously questioning the number of people who have actually played with and against TNN and generated some real data. Its a real card but its also not that amazing. I've already started to cut them from my list and am considering selling the ones I have while they are inflated because, this is Legacy and TNN has some really tough competition to compete with on the curve)

[PirateKing]

this is Legacy and TNN has some really tough competition to compete with on the curve

This is actually my real fear, that people will sideboard better, the format will adapt, and people will realize it's not that scary. But it will always be a threat, it will always require an answer. It will be played in enough decks that every sideboard suddenly lost 2~3 slots. If it was better, then I'd worry less, because then the format would buckle and it would be prime for banning. But really it's not. It's Delver good, which means lots of people are playing, everybody saw it coming, everybody has a sideboard answer for it.

Used to be you had sideboard answers for archetypes. Tormod's Crypt for grave stuff, Reanimator or Dredge, didn't matter. Wrath of God for creatures, Goblins, Zoo again, whole genre hated on. Now it seems more and more sideboard cards are put in for specific single cards. Goblin list with Angel of Despair in the side? Specifically for Show & Tell and nothing else. Sudden uptick of Golgari Charm and Zealous Persecution in the side? Is it because of the success of Elves and D&T? Nope, True-Name Nemesis.

The threat-answer relationship has started to become so narrow and specific. That is how I see the state of the game. That's why I complain.

[rockout]

I lol'd when I saw this thread title. That didn't take long. Has it even been a month? As much as I hate the card for being printed, it's just another creature that has a stipulation on how to answer it. I thought geist was horrible to play against, now we have geist on steroids that requires R&D to give us more ways to combat it like a one drop enchantment that gives all creatures -1/-1. Then there will be a thread about said one drop enchantment being too good.

[Dice_Box]

Used to be you had sideboard answers for archetypes. Tormod's Crypt for grave stuff, Reanimator or Dredge, didn't matter. Wrath of God for creatures, Goblins, Zoo again, whole genre hated on. Now it seems more and more sideboard cards are put in for specific single cards. Goblin list with Angel of Despair in the side? Specifically for Show & Tell and nothing else. Sudden uptick of Golgari Charm and Zealous Persecution in the side? Is it because of the success of Elves and D&T? Nope, True-Name Nemesis.
I wonder sometimes if cards are printed just to push hate of a given type. Grave hate was not good enough to be maindeck. DRS and Ooze. Elves, DnT and what not are starting to take over. Push Hosers. No need to ban. Now you can push one type of card to be a given in sideboards and fix an issue. Not that I think this is completely true, but I feel in part it is.



I lol'd when I saw this thread title. That didn't take long. Has it even been a month? As much as I hate the card for being printed, it's just another creature that has a stipulation on how to answer it. I thought geist was horrible to play against, now we have geist on steroids that requires R&D to give us more ways to combat it like a one drop enchantment that gives all creatures -1/-1. Then there will be a thread about said one drop enchantment being too good.
Because killing Elves, Goblins, DnT, Delver and the other already failing midrange creature decks in one move sounds like such a good idea to me. (Thought I would start that thread...)

[Tormod]

If you really look at the format, what has True-Name Nemesis actually done?

It hasn't pushed out any archetypes out (please don't tell me TNN pushed out Zoo)
If anything its added to format diversity and breathed life into the into UW Stoneblade for almost 10 month were placing only as well as nic fit and burn decks. It given bant aggro a new look. Mono Blue tempo finally has a pair of legs. All these are fair archeypes... really not that scary.

[TsumiBand]

I wonder sometimes if cards are printed just to push hate of a given type. Grave hate was not good enough to be maindeck. DRS and Ooze. Elves, DnT and what not are starting to take over. Push Hosers. No need to ban. Now you can push one type of card to be a given in sideboards and fix an issue. Not that I think this is completely true, but I feel in part it is.

Except, this doesn't necessarily make corner-case cards better against the older matchups than it did before.

I know sometimes WotC says stuff like, "man, we put this HUGE plant in (insert expansion here) for sideboards to deal with (some deck) in (some format), we can't believe it didn't take off". I strongly suspect that it's just an issue of sample size -- they test something in-office with their Approved Sideboard Technology Certifiers, it passes, then they give it to the world and the world all tests it and goes, "the fuck? this is a pile."

I mean, I know card strength is ever-changing, but it isn't like Engineered Plague becomes a better answer to Elves just because someone's playing Stoneblade with TNN. If it wasn't worth the slot beforehand, I suspect it's actually worse now, because it may have replaced your old tech, right? You can't just double-up your answers all the time in the board: so if you have a Tier 1 answer to decks A and B, and test a Tier 2 answer against and find it less good than Tier 1 -- but deck H is forcing your hand, and you still have to consider decks R, F, and Horse -- by choosing the Tier 2 answer, your game against those decks is necessarily *worse* than it was before, right? It's not the end of the world or anything, but it's not like the cards become better just because of one three-drop. I dunno.

EDIT: Also it looks like these are different phenomena being compared. Printing DRS and Ooze brings a higher, more diverse density of graveyard hate -- that's proactive. Printing TNN doesn't necessarily hurt Elves; other people sideboarding in Golgari Charm to deal with TNN *might* hurt Elves, but on the whole it's probably just something they can deal with by like having more Lords or being douchey and playing like Wirewood Herald or whatever -- but it's not *a better card* than it was before, it's still Golgari Charm v. Elves. It just happens to be brought in for the TNN.dec matchup, because it's as good as it gets. Having "only okay" answers be more prevalent is actually kind of better for Elves, isn't it?

[jimmythegreek]

Its kinda scary that blue now has efficient beaters (delver, tnn ). It's almost like wizards was thinking "what's the only aspect of magic that blue doesn't completely dominate?)and then gave it to them.

[Julian23]

Watch out for Tolarian Elves in M15!

[Koby]

Depth Charge
:1::u:
Instant
Deal 3 damage to target creature or player.
KABOOOOMMM!

Totally happening next set.

[Dzra]

Because killing Elves, Goblins, DnT, Delver and the other already failing midrange creature decks in one move sounds like such a good idea to me. (Thought I would start that thread...)

I really don't think Nemesis has killed Elves, DNT, or Delver. Goblins has fallen a lot out of favor recently due to a number of factors (SNT especially), so it's tough to evaluate.

Nemesis by itself really isn't a problem for Goblins or Elves as they can both swarm over the top (Piledriver seems good there). Like always, those decks have trouble if a creature gets equipped with a Jitte... not a whole lot has probably changed there.

DNT is hardly dead and has simply adjusted by playing more fliers. Delver is still ever-present and even won the GP; I'm not sure what your point there was. If Nemesis killed anything, it is the midranged GBx decks like BUG and Jund that rely on trading cards and picking up 2-for-1s... but even that has yet to be seen.

I really hate Nemesis's design, but I don't think the meta is exactly in upheaval over it.

[Tormod]

Depth Charge
:1::u:
Instant
Deal 3 damage to target creature or player.
KABOOOOMMM!

Totally happening next set.

you forgot split second, that it draws a card
and alt cost: return a blue card from your graveyard to your hand

[jimmythegreek]

Depth Charge
:1::u:
Instant
Deal 3 damage to target creature or player.
KABOOOOMMM!

Totally happening next set.

Its funny cuz psionic blast is a card...but not a card....get it ?

[lavafrogg]

This thread is so rediculous.

The only thing bad about nemisis is that it is blue. The protection from player fits the theme and flavor of the card and is kind of interesting in and of itself.

That being said the card should be white and DnT should be an even better deck, giving us a plethora of decks that don't play blue. I think wizards does a good job for the most part but they really need to push other colors for a little bit. 1WW would have given stoneforge a great creature to equip to and would have felt the flavor of white a hell of a lot more.

Also, if the card would have been 2/2 first strike pro: player for 1WW it would have been a normal card instead of the garbage grey have us.

That being said a 3/1 clock is not that great, and for three mana you can get creatures that do a hell of a lot more that nemisis, I'm looking at you knight of the reliquary.

Cool card, aweful color, I wouldn't be mad if it didn't happen.

[Shawon]

The only thing bad about nemisis is that it is blue. The protection from player fits the theme and flavor of the card and is kind of interesting in and of itself.


I can buy the claim that 'protection from player' is a blue theme, since it's also a Rogue and Rogue creatures are good at infiltration as shown through mechanics like shadow or unblockability. However, the guy should have come with a "can't block" clause on it, not only to make it more balanced, but it makes the "protection from a player" mechanic seem more dedicated to singling out a player, such that creatures aren't even acknowledged by the True-Name Nemesis since it only cares about its nemesis, the chosen player. But whatever, the damage has been dealt, so now we must deal and adapt.

[Fatal]

Yes// Preventing dmg on blocks (protection) is so damn blue..

I think Wizards should get red card for printing such a shitty cards - nothing more - unless we get more of them or Blue StP - since its so damn blue, then you have no reason to splash any colors.

[coraz86]

"Protection from player" is like a joke ability from Unglued. Ban this crap from legacy asap.

Yeah, "protection from player" sounds like a Pimp: the Backhanding (http://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/15064/pimp-the-backhanding) card.

[Ellomdian]

Should TNN be banned? No.

Would I like to see it gone? No.

Would I like to see people adapt more rapidly to changing environmental factors, and break out of their precious envelopes?

I feel like the question answers itself...

[Dice_Box]

Yeah, "protection from player" sounds like a Pimp: the Backhanding (http://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/15064/pimp-the-backhanding) card.
I read that title and thought "Bet that's a White Wolf game." Yep.

[Higgs]

Would I like to see people adapt...

And there you're missing the whole point. It's not about not being smart enough to play some more Verdict/Zealous Persecution/Golgari Charm/Massacre/Deluge... It's about design, principles and this game's direction.

The least of my worries would be to be able to beat TNN when I'm already playing Miracles (read buncha sweepers) and Storm (read don't care about TNN), and when I already have the cards for Patriot and Esperblade sitting in my binder to sleeve up some TNN decks. Dismissing the complaints as losers whining would be playing 3 monkeys. Like Maro.

[Griselpuff]

I literally cannot stand this card. Watching SCG coverage with Jacob Wilson TNN vs. the EsperBlade player's TNN is just so. fucking. dumb.

[HSCK]

I like that it enables interactive decks, despite its lack of interactivity. Keep it.

[Arsenal]

I like that it enables interactive decks, despite its lack of interactivity. Keep it.

What exactly is TNN enabling? Every deck that TNN sees play in existed before TNN.

[menace13]

I like Shawon's idea on the no blocking clause. Who knew that an easily castable, non-legendary creature with shroud, immune to damage, protection from creatures, abilities, and spells would be good? :rolleyes:

Stoneforge Mystic has found her bff. Esperblade seems like the best fit at the moment and URW Delver would be my 2nd choice. There isn't much reason to not play it with equipment because it beats any other castable creature across the board. It can't be pinned down to wall mode by larger goyf/KotR if I'm playing removal and Jitte. The game is likely over unless wipes. sacs, negative counters. Figthng it on the stack can easily be mitigated by discard, counters, Cavern, or Vials(not played currently). I can protect it from discard, and sweepers with cantrips, discard and counters. Very little investment for the value it brings to blue decks. Crushes creature decks. It's not like those decks can't beat combo either because I put TNN and Mystic in the 75.

[btm10]

I'm actually most interested by what the long-run equilibrium metagame will be. If TNN is going to drive more people into combo (to race him) and RUG (because RUG can/does run him and RUG is good against combo), doesn't that just strengthen "real" control decks like Miracles since they have (or in principle can have) answers to both?

The only card I can think of being banned/restricted because it was "unfun" is Trinisphere in Vintage circa 2003/2004, and even in that case there was a legitimate concern over format-warping as well. I don't see that happening with TNN. It is, after all, a creature that dies to about a thousand removal spells. And even if it does end up making Delver decks so good in the long run that a ban would be warranted, I'd sign up to see Balance unbanned before banning TNN.

[menace13]

It is, after all, a creature that dies to about a thousand removal spells. And even if it does end up making Delver decks so good in the long run that a ban would be warranted, I'd sign up to see Balance unbanned before banning TNN.
By a thousand you mean like 7? Balance?

[Zombie]

I'd sign up to see Balance unbanned before banning TNN.

This statement is insane.

[btm10]

By a thousand you mean like 7? Balance?

Off the top of my head: Terminus. Supreme Verdict. Wrath of God. Liliana of the Veil. Chainer's Edict. Diabolic Edict. Innocent Blood. Smallpox. Zealous Persecution. Pernicious Deed. Massacre. I could do this all day. And this ignores the fact that Red Elemental Blast and Pyroblast can stop him on the stack for :r:.


This statement is insane.

The only argument against it is that it blows aggro completely out of the water, and that's already happened. The current metagame wouldn't be dominated by Rack/Balance or anything even remotely resembling it. And even if that domination happened, I'd rather have a comical throwback metagame for a season than ban a creature that didn't absolutely have to be banned because you were too lazy to find an answer.

[menace13]

Off the top of my head: Terminus. Supreme Verdict. Wrath of God. Liliana of the Veil. Chainer's Edict. Diabolic Edict. Innocent Blood. Smallpox. Zealous Persecution. Pernicious Deed. Massacre. I could do this all day.
.
Wrath = Verdict, so you're down 1. Lol a Smallpox, really reaching there. I will gift you with an EE because I'm nice. So that brings you back to.... 7?


And this ignores the fact that Red Elemental Blast and Pyroblast can stop him on the stack for :r:. Ummm....

It is, after all, a creature that dies to about a thousand removal spells.
We werent on that were we now?

[Aggro_zombies]

I'm actually most interested by what the long-run equilibrium metagame will be. If TNN is going to drive more people into combo (to race him) and RUG (because RUG can/does run him and RUG is good against combo), doesn't that just strengthen "real" control decks like Miracles since they have (or in principle can have) answers to both?
The interaction you've laid out here is a pretty textbook example of a format warping around a particular card, actually. You are playing a deck that never needs to interact with it (combo), a deck that runs it (some sort of U/x/y tempo or midrange deck), or a deck that preys on the decks in the second category.

It's also worth noting that many of the removal spells you've listed are not things that are playable across a huge category of decks. The sweepers basically only go in some sort of Miracles deck or Tier 2/Tier 2.5 Homebrew Control decks. The black spells will see play in Jund or BUG (a deck that can run its own Nemeses) and then a bunch of Tier 2.5 or below decks like Pox. Pyroblast and REB are nice and all, but red has basically no answers to a resolved TNN, so relying on them to protect yourself is super dicey; they end up being better in TNN decks as sideboard options against other TNN decks than they are in decks that don't want to run TNN.

And that's the problem. You're not so much building to a metagame, you're building to a single card. It chases non-TNN aggro decks out of the metagame because they're not fast enough to race it, don't have good solutions to it (are you seriously going to sweep your own board away for one TNN?), and can't exactly ignore it. It forces midrange decks to run blue for their own TNNs plus counters for answers, or makes them run a bunch of awkward do-nothing sideboard options like Golgari Charm in the hopes of beating it. It strengthens combo decks, which were clearly already paragons of interactivity for non-blue decks.

If TNN isn't a clear signal that you should be playing Brainstorm or you're doing it wrong, I don't know what is.

[Amon Amarth]

Regarding TNN and other aggro decks: Goblins at least has Piledriver, Krenko and removal for the equipment that makes TNN a real threat. Theoretically, it shouldn't make the midrange matchups that bad, though I haven't been able to test them as of yet.

[btm10]

The interaction you've laid out here is a pretty textbook example of a format warping around a particular card, actually. You are playing a deck that never needs to interact with it (combo), a deck that runs it (some sort of U/x/y tempo or midrange deck), or a deck that preys on the decks in the second category.

It's also worth noting that many of the removal spells you've listed are not things that are playable across a huge category of decks. The sweepers basically only go in some sort of Miracles deck or Tier 2/Tier 2.5 Homebrew Control decks. The black spells will see play in Jund or BUG (a deck that can run its own Nemeses) and then a bunch of Tier 2.5 or below decks like Pox. Pyroblast and REB are nice and all, but red has basically no answers to a resolved TNN, so relying on them to protect yourself is super dicey; they end up being better in TNN decks as sideboard options against other TNN decks than they are in decks that don't want to run TNN.

And that's the problem. You're not so much building to a metagame, you're building to a single card. It chases non-TNN aggro decks out of the metagame because they're not fast enough to race it, don't have good solutions to it (are you seriously going to sweep your own board away for one TNN?), and can't exactly ignore it. It forces midrange decks to run blue for their own TNNs plus counters for answers, or makes them run a bunch of awkward do-nothing sideboard options like Golgari Charm in the hopes of beating it. It strengthens combo decks, which were clearly already paragons of interactivity for non-blue decks.

If TNN isn't a clear signal that you should be playing Brainstorm or you're doing it wrong, I don't know what is.

I wouldn't call this warping, at least not in the Trinisphere-in-Vintage sense. Yes, TNN has created a disequilibrium in the metagame, but any card that makes it into Legacy or Vintage and isn't a marginally better replacement for an existing card is going to do that. That's how eternal metagames change, rather than by rotation. Warping around card X is "every deck must either play X , answer X as soon as it resolves, or lose to X (functionally as soon as it resolves)." You could say "you'll lose to any threat that isn't answered" but when RUG wins and you had no answer for Goyf, they likely would have been able to kill you with Delver (or TNN) anyway, so it was the deck rather than Goyf beating you. When decks went Shop --> Trinisphere, you lost if you didn't have your own Shops or a Force, and you lost to Trinisphere rather than to the rest of their deck (meaning you had to mull to Force if you weren't running Shops).

Ironically, your point about the removal that hits TNN being mostly run in "Tier 2 or lower" decks is one reason I think the effect TNN has on the metagame is interesting - if he makes the decks he's in good enough to make a deck strong enough to compete just because it has a good TNN.dec matchup, I say that's a feature, not a bug. The only way the meta gets worse is if RUG or UW TNN decks start weakening their combo matchups to deal with hate and more conventional control decks don't step in to fill the void, leading to some sort of combo-dominated field. If for some reason that happened, there'd be a case for banning. But I don't see that happening. And there's probably a control build out there that can prey on both TNN.dec AND combo.

[ESG]

Regarding TNN and other aggro decks: Goblins at least has Piledriver, Krenko and removal for the equipment that makes TNN a real threat. Theoretically, it shouldn't make the midrange matchups that bad, though I haven't been able to test them as of yet.

Pretty sure this is the worst environment yet for Goblins. Lots of combo, control decks packed with sweepers, and Nemesis decks. Swords + Snapcaster + Zealous Persecution + TNN + Stoneforge + Jitte (like the list that just won SCG Oakland) seems really rough for Goblins.



Ironically, your point about the removal that hits TNN being mostly run in "Tier 2 or lower" decks is one reason I think the effect TNN has on the metagame is interesting - if he makes the decks he's in good enough to make a deck strong enough to compete just because it has a good TNN.dec matchup, I say that's a feature, not a bug.

Except that these decks get mutilated by the various strains of combo, which just means that the combo decks and/or the Nemesis decks rise to the top by the end of the 9-round tournament.


The interaction you've laid out here is a pretty textbook example of a format warping around a particular card, actually. You are playing a deck that never needs to interact with it (combo), a deck that runs it (some sort of U/x/y tempo or midrange deck), or a deck that preys on the decks in the second category.

It's also worth noting that many of the removal spells you've listed are not things that are playable across a huge category of decks. The sweepers basically only go in some sort of Miracles deck or Tier 2/Tier 2.5 Homebrew Control decks. The black spells will see play in Jund or BUG (a deck that can run its own Nemeses) and then a bunch of Tier 2.5 or below decks like Pox. Pyroblast and REB are nice and all, but red has basically no answers to a resolved TNN, so relying on them to protect yourself is super dicey; they end up being better in TNN decks as sideboard options against other TNN decks than they are in decks that don't want to run TNN.

And that's the problem. You're not so much building to a metagame, you're building to a single card. It chases non-TNN aggro decks out of the metagame because they're not fast enough to race it, don't have good solutions to it (are you seriously going to sweep your own board away for one TNN?), and can't exactly ignore it. It forces midrange decks to run blue for their own TNNs plus counters for answers, or makes them run a bunch of awkward do-nothing sideboard options like Golgari Charm in the hopes of beating it. It strengthens combo decks, which were clearly already paragons of interactivity for non-blue decks.

If TNN isn't a clear signal that you should be playing Brainstorm or you're doing it wrong, I don't know what is.

Excellent post.

[Barook]

Looking at the latest SGC Open, I think we're heading exactly in the predicted direction we don't want to see:

1) TNN decks: Esper Stoneblade, UWR Delver
2) Anti-TNN decks: D&T (race and ignore), Miracles (sweepers for TNN), Affinity (rather a odd one, but tons of evasion + equipment goes into the "race and ignore" category)
3) Various combo decks that completely ignore it.

The two RUG decks are the only ones that don't fall in said categories.

[humppa]

Looking at the latest SGC Open, I think we're heading exactly in the predicted direction we don't want to see:

1) TNN decks: Esper Stoneblade, UWR Delver
2) Anti-TNN decks: D&T (race and ignore), Miracles (sweepers for TNN), Affinity (rather a odd one, but tons of evasion + equipment goes into the "race and ignore" category)
3) Various combo decks that completely ignore it.

The two RUG decks are the only ones that don't fall in said categories.

I.e. standard metagame
Stoneblade
Patriot
Canadian
D&T
Miracles
Storm
Affinity (welcome back!)

everything is ok, is not it?

[lordofthepit]

Looking at the latest SGC Open, I think we're heading exactly in the predicted direction we don't want to see:

1) TNN decks: Esper Stoneblade, UWR Delver
2) Anti-TNN decks: D&T (race and ignore), Miracles (sweepers for TNN), Affinity (rather a odd one, but tons of evasion + equipment goes into the "race and ignore" category)
3) Various combo decks that completely ignore it.

The two RUG decks are the only ones that don't fall in said categories.

The two RUG decks have adopted TNN in their sideboards (as 2-ofs).

[Esper3k]

I.e. standard metagame
Stoneblade
Patriot
Canadian
D&T
Miracles
Storm
Affinity (welcome back!)

everything is ok, is not it?

A bunch of different decks in the T8. Seems fine to me.

[Star|Scream]

I.e. standard metagame
Stoneblade
Patriot
Canadian
D&T
Miracles
Storm
Affinity (welcome back!)

everything is ok, is not it?

This

Can anyone point me to a Starcity Games Top 8 BEFORE TNN was printed that had affinity, elves, combo, stoneblade, tempo AND death and taxes in it?

It's really disturbing how people see a wide-open metagame and are saying "oh well it's only TNN, Anti-TNN and Combo." It's absurd.

[Zombie]

I.e. standard metagame
Stoneblade
Patriot
Canadian
D&T
Miracles
Storm
Affinity (welcome back!)

everything is ok, is not it?

MBA
Balance Flash
Cabal Flash
Vial Goblins
Bw Midrange
UW Tempo
RUG Gro
Flash

Look! GP Columbus was healthy!

[Arsenal]

For those arguing that the top 8 is healthy and diverse (even though it's littered with TNN decks), did you actually watch the stream? Those TNN mirrors, and there were plenty of them, were pretty silly to watch. It boiled down to who had either (a.) more TNN than their opponent and/or (b.) who could keep more equipment on board for their TNN to trump their opponent's TNN.

[Admiral_Arzar]

Except that these decks get mutilated by the various strains of combo, which just means that the combo decks and/or the Nemesis decks rise to the top by the end of the 9-round tournament.


As a player who likes both combo and random rogue decks, this is the elephant in the room. Most tier 2-3 strategies are either aggro (Stompy), old prison decks (Enchantress), or combo whose time has passed (Aluren). I like these decks, but they mostly haven't been good for years (if ever). These decks pretty much all fold to modern combo decks, especially overpowered monstrosities like Sneak and Show. They also tend to not be good against value-based U/x midrange decks, because it's difficult to set up your janky strategy when facing countermagic, a fast clock, and overwhelming card advantage. TNN is not going to lead to a more diverse format, because the decks that would be poised to answer it fold to combo and/or the modern blue decks themselves.


MBA
Balance Flash
Cabal Flash
Vial Goblins
Bw Midrange
UW Tempo
RUG Gro
Flash

Look! GP Columbus was healthy!

LOL. It's funny how "diverse" that top eight was, I had forgotten. Honestly though, the only thing that would convince the pro-TNN zealots on this board is if WOTC actually banned it. Players will go to great lengths to try and ignore obvious warping of the format by a card they like.


For those arguing that the top 8 is healthy and diverse (even though it's littered with TNN decks), did you actually watch the stream? Those TNN mirrors, and there were plenty of them, were pretty silly to watch. It boiled down to who had either (a.) more TNN than their opponent and/or (b.) who could keep more equipment on board for their TNN to trump their opponent's TNN.

Having now played against the card a few times, I can confirm that it is the worst-designed card in memory, and watching mirrors makes me want to play non-interactive combo decks. SFM just adds insult to injury, as the "slow, 7-turn clock" becomes a hell of a lot faster with any equipment ever.

[Esper3k]

For those arguing that the top 8 is healthy and diverse (even though it's littered with TNN decks), did you actually watch the stream? Those TNN mirrors, and there were plenty of them, were pretty silly to watch. It boiled down to who had either (a.) more TNN than their opponent and/or (b.) who could keep more equipment on board for their TNN to trump their opponent's TNN.

As we all know, what is shown on stream is representative of the overall meta at a tournament.

I actually found the Gordon vs Wilson match in the T8 the most interesting match they showed on camera. There was a bunch of tension in every game, even when TNNs came down on both sides.

While there were 4 decks that played TNN, it was broken down evenly across two very different decks (the controlling Esper Stoneblade vs Turtenwald's UWR list). Given that Turtenwald's list recently won the GP, it's not surprising to see an uptick in that list. I would expect to see an uptick in whatever deck wins any large tournament.

Calling any deck that plays any TNN a "True-Name deck" is about as accurate as lumping all decks that play Show & Tell or Brainstorm together.

There were more Stoneforge Mystics than there were True-Name Nemesis in the T8.

[Admiral_Arzar]

There were more Stoneforge Mystics than there were True-Name Nemesis in the T8.

Obviously, the vast majority of TNN decks play SFM (and often play more copies of SFM than TNN), but there are some decks with Mystic but no TNN.

[Arsenal]

As we all know, what is shown on stream is representative of the overall meta at a tournament.

I actually found the Gordon vs Wilson match in the T8 the most interesting match they showed on camera. There was a bunch of tension in every game, even when TNNs came down on both sides.

While there were 4 decks that played TNN, it was broken down evenly across two very different decks (the controlling Esper Stoneblade vs Turtenwald's UWR list). Given that Turtenwald's list recently won the GP, it's not surprising to see an uptick in that list. I would expect to see an uptick in whatever deck wins any large tournament.

Calling any deck that plays any TNN a "True-Name deck" is about as accurate as lumping all decks that play Show & Tell or Brainstorm together.

There were more Stoneforge Mystics than there were True-Name Nemesis in the T8.

Seeing as they stream the feature decks/players, and then the entire Top 8, yes, one could reasonably argue that the stream of the Top 8 is fairly representative of the overall meta (not including tier 3/4 crap). Look at this forum's DTB decks, then go back and watch the archived streams... see any similarities?

The last time a blue-based SFM deck was a thing was GP Denver. After that, it fell off the face of the planet (although Deathblade was cute for a week I suppose). Once TNN is printed, it's not surprising that SFM saw a tremendous uptick as TNN + Equipment = GGPO (as evidenced by tourney results + stream coverage).

Same with UWR Delver. Pre-TNN, it played stuff like Geist of Saint Traft, but that wasn't effective as it died to a blocking 4/5 Goyf and it could be Rough/Tumble, Pyroclasm, etc. So it remained firmly entrenched in tier 2 status. TNN is released and voila!, tier 1 status and it wins a GP.

[Esper3k]

Obviously, the vast majority of TNN decks play SFM (and often play more copies of SFM than TNN), but there are some decks with Mystic but no TNN.

Sure, but no one whines about SFM "warping" the format or cries about it needing to be banned. Without Equipment, TNN just isn't that scary.


Seeing as they stream the feature decks/players, and then the entire Top 8, yes, one could reasonably argue that the stream of the Top 8 is fairly representative of the overall meta (not including tier 3/4 crap). Look at this forum's DTB decks, then go back and watch the archived streams... see any similarities?

The last time a blue-based SFM deck was a thing was GP Denver. After that, it fell off the face of the planet (although Deathblade was cute for a week I suppose). Once TNN is printed, it's not surprising that SFM saw a tremendous uptick as TNN + Equipment = GGPO (as evidenced by tourney results + stream coverage).

Same with UWR Delver. Pre-TNN, it played stuff like Geist of Saint Traft, but that wasn't effective as it died to a blocking 4/5 Goyf and it could be Rough/Tumble, Pyroclasm, etc. So it remained firmly entrenched in tier 2 status. TNN is released and voila!, tier 1 status and it wins a GP.

Saying that the streams follow pros and the T8 is representative of the meta? I call bs on that. Legacy has always been notorious for people playing various decks, even if they aren't the most commonly played ones. According to your statement, TNN + SFM decks (even lumping the control SFM lists with the aggressive Delver lists) would be 50% of the meta at SCG Oakland. I find it hard to believe that in any large Legacy tournament, any particular archetype will break 30% of a field.

You're kidding about blue-based SFM decks not being a thing since Denver and UWR being Tier 2 before TNN, right?

11/10/13 SCG Fort Worth: 8th Place - UWR Miracles w/ Stoneforge Mystic (http://sales.starcitygames.com//deckdatabase/displaydeck.php?DeckID=60558)
10/27/13 SCG Indianapolis Invitational Legacy Open: 1st - Bant (http://sales.starcitygames.com//deckdatabase/displaydeck.php?DeckID=60210)
10/27/13 SCG Indianapolis Invitational Legacy Open: T8 (the decklist listings are messed up) - UWR Delver (http://sales.starcitygames.com//deckdatabase/displaydeck.php?DeckID=60241)
10/20/13 SCG Seattle: 2nd Place - UWR Delver (http://sales.starcitygames.com//deckdatabase/displaydeck.php?DeckID=59999)
10/13/13 SCG Milwaukee: 8th Place - UWR Delver (http://sales.starcitygames.com//deckdatabase/displaydeck.php?DeckID=59855)
10/03/13 SCG Cleveland: 1st Place - UWR Delver (http://sales.starcitygames.com//deckdatabase/displaydeck.php?DeckID=59742)
09/14/13 SCG Atlanta: 4th - UWR Delver (http://sales.starcitygames.com//deckdatabase/displaydeck.php?DeckID=59115)
04/14/13: GP Strasbourg: 15th Place - Esper Stoneblade (http://www.wizards.com/magic/magazine/article.aspx?x=mtg/daily/eventcoverage/gpstr13/welcome#2)

I would argue that since UWR Delver really made its big debuts at the 07/26-28 SCG Invitational when Erik Smith (primary creator of the deck) won the Invitational and Gerard Fabiano won the Legacy Open that weekend both with pretty much the same 75, it's been a Tier 1 deck since then.

Esper Stoneblade and Deathblade variants have been a part of the meta for quite awhile now as well.

In short, ever since the printing of Batterskull and the breakout of SFM + Batterskull at GP Providence, UW/x Stoneblade decks have always been a player in the overall Legacy meta.

[Arsenal]

Those results compared to the heyday of Maverick/Blade Control/RUG Delver? Not even close. As I already stated, UWx Blade decks post-GP Denver had faded back to Tier 2 status. Now, due to TNN, they're rising back up to Tier 1 status. Stream coverage is fairly representative of tier 1/tier 2 dekcs, I remember seeing Sneak and Show, UWR Delver, Esper Blade, Elves, ANT, Bant Blade, Omni-Tell, etc. All viable tier 1/tier 2 decks. Not sure what you're saying about 50% anything...

[Esper3k]

Those results compared to the heyday of Maverick/Blade Control/RUG Delver? Not even close. As I already stated, UWx Blade decks post-GP Denver had faded back to Tier 2 status. Now, due to TNN, they're rising back up to Tier 1 status. Stream coverage is fairly representative of tier 1/tier 2 dekcs, I remember seeing Sneak and Show, UWR Delver, Esper Blade, Elves, ANT, Bant Blade, Omni-Tell, etc. All viable tier 1/tier 2 decks. Not sure what you're saying about 50% anything...

RUG Delver is still most likely the most commonly played deck in any given Legacy tournament.

Those results I listed were from before TNN was printed. My argument is that UWx Stoneblade decks were never Tier 2, much less after GP Denver. On top of that, the UWR Delver deck, since it's real breakout debut at the SCG Invitational in July this year has always been Tier 1. The amount of that deck you consistently see in T8's of large Legacy tournaments, even before the printing of TNN, shows that it's a Tier 1 deck. Certainly TNN makes it stronger, but it was already Tier 1 before that.

I believe we may be talking about two different things when we talk about metagame. When I talk about the metagame of a particular tournament, I'm talking about the percentage of each deck that makes up the population of the particular tournament. I'm not referring to the different decks played, but the amounts they are played as well. If there are 3 MUD decks being played at a 300 man tournament and one of them makes it onto a feature match, I do not find that representative of the meta, for example. Stream coverage by its nature needs to focus on showing pro / famous players or unique/interesting decks at the top tables in order to generate excitement and viewership. So, rather than getting a representative showing of the breakdown of decks at the tournament, the decks you see on camera are typically skewed towards the ones performing well at that a particular tournament to begin with, then shortened down to a subgroup of decks played by pros / famous players or the oddball weird deck.

There's nothing inherently wrong with this, but what you see on camera is rarely representative of the actual metagame of the tournament.

[Arsenal]

I'd argue that based on your results, tcdecks.net (the most comprehensive tourney compiler out there, imo), and this forum's DTB section, UWx Blade decks faded from tier 1 to tier 2 post-GP Denver although I admit that Deathblade had a recent moment or two in the DTB if I recall correctly, but that was very short lived. I never said the Blade decks died, I stated that they were once tier 1, faded back to tier 2, and now it appears they'll be getting back to tier 1 largely due to TNN.

Also, if the top tables have mostly the same top decks week in and week out, then do the rest of the decks really matter? I don't understand why you'd care about the 298th place Grixis Fairies deck if a top 8 is 3x TNN-Blade, 2x Delver-tempo, 1x Storm combo, 1x Show-and-Tell combo, 1x Elves. All I care about is tier 1 as that dictates what the rest of the format can and can't do.

[HSCK]

TNN is the sole reason Stoneblade is back, so what did it push out of tier 1 exactly? Is the Stoneblade archetype interactive? Is it bad for Legacy?

[Esper3k]

I'd argue that based on your results, tcdecks.net (the most comprehensive tourney compiler out there, imo), and this forum's DTB section, UWx Blade decks faded from tier 1 to tier 2 post-GP Denver although I admit that Deathblade had a recent moment or two in the DTB if I recall correctly, but that was very short lived. I never said the Blade decks died, I stated that they were once tier 1, faded back to tier 2, and now it appears they'll be getting back to tier 1 largely due to TNN.

Going by TCDecks' Tier decks history of 2013 (we won't argue the accuracy of TCDecks' ability to predict the overall metagame):

GP Denver 2013 was January 5-6.

January: 1st - Blade Control
February: 1st - Blade Control
March: 3rd - Blade Control
April: 1st - Blade Control
May: 4th - Blade Control
June: 11th - Blade Control, 13th - Patriot (we see a dip in Blade Control here)
July: 3rd - Deathblade, 9th - Patriot, 14th - Blade Control
August: 14th - Patriot, 17th - Deathblade, 18th - Blade Control (another bad month for Stoneblade)
September: 4th - Patriot, 15th - Deathblade, 24th - Blade Control
October: 4th - Patriot, 18th - Blade Control, 23rd - Deathblade
November: 2nd - Patriot, 4th - Blade Control, 17th - Deathblade

http://www.tcdecks.net/tierdecks.php?anio=2013&mes=2&format=Legacy

As you can see, with the exceptions of June and August, we have always had a UWx Stoneblade deck in the tier 1. Post-Denver was actually Blade Control's best months.

As expected with TNN, we are seeing Blade Control starting to make a comeback (Patriot is still doing well) and I wouldn't be surprised to see Deathblade start coming back as well.

So, while TNN obviously does make the UW/x SFM decks better, they were hardly Tier 2 before TNN was around.



Also, if the top tables have mostly the same top decks week in and week out, then do the rest of the decks really matter? I don't understand why you'd care about the 298th place Grixis Fairies deck if a top 8 is 3x TNN-Blade, 2x Delver-tempo, 1x Storm combo, 1x Show-and-Tell combo, 1x Elves. All I care about is tier 1 as that dictates what the rest of the format can and can't do.

So now you're getting into a different conversation from if streaming coverage is representative of the metagame of a tournament (which I believe it isn't).

If you want to talk about why you should care about the non-tier 1 meta, there's a plethora of arguments about that, especially in a format as broad as Legacy. You can very easily face 8 different decks in 8 different rounds. The power level difference between Tier 1 and Tier 1.5/2 decks in Legacy is very small. What you'll face in your Swiss rounds is likely to be very different from what you'll face in a T8. Local metagames (US vs Europe, East coast vs West coast, for example) matter greatly in Legacy. Etc, etc, etc.

[Arsenal]

Going by TCDecks' Tier decks history of 2013 (we won't argue the accuracy of TCDecks' ability to predict the overall metagame):

GP Denver 2013 was January 5-6.

January: 1st - Blade Control
February: 1st - Blade Control
March: 3rd - Blade Control
April: 1st - Blade Control
May: 4th - Blade Control
June: 11th - Blade Control, 13th - Patriot (we see a dip in Blade Control here)
July: 3rd - Deathblade, 9th - Patriot, 14th - Blade Control
August: 14th - Patriot, 17th - Deathblade, 18th - Blade Control (another bad month for Stoneblade)
September: 4th - Patriot, 15th - Deathblade, 24th - Blade Control
October: 4th - Patriot, 18th - Blade Control, 23rd - Deathblade
November: 2nd - Patriot, 4th - Blade Control, 17th - Deathblade

http://www.tcdecks.net/tierdecks.php?anio=2013&mes=2&format=Legacy

As you can see, with the exceptions of June and August, we have always had a UWx Stoneblade deck in the tier 1. Post-Denver was actually Blade Control's best months.

As expected with TNN, we are seeing Blade Control starting to make a comeback (Patriot is still doing well) and I wouldn't be surprised to see Deathblade start coming back as well.

So, while TNN obviously does make the UW/x SFM decks better, they were hardly Tier 2 before TNN was around.



So now you're getting into a different conversation from if streaming coverage is representative of the metagame of a tournament (which I believe it isn't).

If you want to talk about why you should care about the non-tier 1 meta, there's a plethora of arguments about that, especially in a format as broad as Legacy. You can very easily face 8 different decks in 8 different rounds. The power level difference between Tier 1 and Tier 1.5/2 decks in Legacy is very small. What you'll face in your Swiss rounds is likely to be very different from what you'll face in a T8. Local metagames (US vs Europe, East coast vs West coast, for example) matter greatly in Legacy. Etc, etc, etc.

From Feb-April 2013, Blade Control enjoyed tier 1 status, but once you hit May 2013, you see a very steep decline in Blade Control (I believe this was due to the rising of Jund, could be wrong though). The data backs up what I said; post GP Denver, blue-based SFM decks went from tier 1 to tier 2, then once TNN was released, BOOM, back to tier 1 again overnight.

May 2013 - Position: 4
June 2013 - Position: 11 (tier 2)
July 2013 - Position: 14, tier 2 (as I acknowledged, Deathblade had a nice moment in the sun at position #3 and Patriot is still tier 2, imo at #9)
August 2013 - Position: 18, tier 2 (Patriot #14, Deathblade #17)... sounds firmly tier 2 to me
September 2013 - Position: 24, tier 2 (Patriot is tier 1 this month at #4, Deathblade is tier 2 at #15)
October 2013 - Position: 18, tier 2 (Patriot stays in tier 1 again at #4, Deathblade is tier 2 at #23)
November 2013 (TNN release) - Position: 4 (Patriot is entrenched at #2, Deathblade sees a nominal jump to #17)

So to recap, there's a downward trend for Blade Control of #4 - #11 - #14 - #18 - #24 - #18 - TNN is released and it's #4 again. Patriot is tier 2 in July, then tier 1 around Sept. Deathblade is tier 1 for one month (July), then it's relegated to tier 2 and hasn't left.

Also, I may have been too harsh when stating that "I don't care". I do care and note what's happening in tier 2 (and even tier 3 if my SB cards can do some splash damage), but my main concern is how to beat the tier 1 decks. If tier 1 is RUG Delver, Elves, Storm combo and Sneak Attack, I'm going to make my maindeck and SB decisions largely based off that. I'm not going to devote 2 SB cards solely for Imperial Painter when I could use those slots to beef up my Sneak Attack matchup; if my SB card hates both decks, great!, but I'm making my decision based off what I expect to see.

Back in April 2013, I attended SCG Milwaukee. I was on Vidi's GP Denver EsperBlade list and I anticiplated seeing RUG Delver (tier 1), Reanimator/TinFins (DTB at the time), Blade Control (tier 1 at the time), and Sneak and Show (tier 1 at the time). I was aware that other tier 1 and tier 2 decks existed, but thought my maindeck was solid enough for whatever, but those matchups I wanted to focus on, so I SBed accordingly.

I played against Esperblade, TinFins, Maverick, RUG Delver, Goblins, Eggs (yep), Burn, Belcher, Dredge. I metagamed correctly for tier 1 and saw 3/4 of the tier 1 decks in my rounds. The other decks I played due to losing (lost to RUG Delver and I deserve to play against Burn I suppose). My maindeck was solid enough to wreck Maverick, Burn, Eggs, Belcher, Esperblade.

EDIT: Great article about TNN, format diversity (perhaps a natual ebb and flow, perhaps not), etc. http://www.channelfireball.com/articles/december-2013-legacy-metagame-analysis/

Also, as I stated in the other thread, TNN mirrors are just plain unfun for me. If others enjoy having TNN races, great, but I don't. I play with TNN (UW Stoneblade) and against it all of the time and it's far less enjoyable when I win on the back of TNN.

[Esper3k]

The last time a blue-based SFM deck was a thing was GP Denver. After that, it fell off the face of the planet (although Deathblade was cute for a week I suppose). Once TNN is printed, it's not surprising that SFM saw a tremendous uptick as TNN + Equipment = GGPO (as evidenced by tourney results + stream coverage).

Same with UWR Delver. Pre-TNN, it played stuff like Geist of Saint Traft, but that wasn't effective as it died to a blocking 4/5 Goyf and it could be Rough/Tumble, Pyroclasm, etc. So it remained firmly entrenched in tier 2 status. TNN is released and voila!, tier 1 status and it wins a GP.

This is what you said in the post that started all this discussion about the performance of "blue-based SFM" post GP Denver.

Other than the months of July (where we still had a blue-based SFM deck - Deathblade, performing well) and August, a blue-based SFM deck (be it Blade Control, Patriot, or Deathblade per TCDecks' categories) has always been Tier 1 according to the TCDeck data.


From Feb-April 2013, Blade Control enjoyed tier 1 status, but once you hit May 2013, you see a very steep decline in Blade Control (I believe this was due to the rising of Jund, could be wrong though). The data backs up what I said; post GP Denver, blue-based SFM decks went from tier 1 to tier 2, then once TNN was released, BOOM, back to tier 1 again overnight.

May 2013 - Position: 4
June 2013 - Position: 11 (tier 2)
July 2013 - Position: 14, tier 2 (as I acknowledged, Deathblade had a nice moment in the sun at position #3 and Patriot is still tier 2, imo at #9)
August 2013 - Position: 18, tier 2 (Patriot #14, Deathblade #17)... sounds firmly tier 2 to me
September 2013 - Position: 24, tier 2 (Patriot is tier 1 this month at #4, Deathblade is tier 2 at #15)
October 2013 - Position: 18, tier 2 (Patriot stays in tier 1 again at #4, Deathblade is tier 2 at #23)
November 2013 (TNN release) - Position: 4 (Patriot is entrenched at #2, Deathblade sees a nominal jump to #17)

So to recap, there's a downward trend for Blade Control of #4 - #11 - #14 - #18 - #24 - #18 - TNN is released and it's #4 again. Patriot is tier 2 in July, then tier 1 around Sept. Deathblade is tier 1 for one month (July), then it's relegated to tier 2 and hasn't left.

No, the data shows that blue based SFM decks have pretty much always (with the exception of August) had a deck close to the top, according to TCDeck data.

Second, it also shows that UWR Delver (aka Patriot) was Tier 1 before the printing of TNN. TNN certainly makes these decks stronger, but it isn't the cause of blue based SFM decks going from "fell off the face of the planet" to Tier 1 all of the sudden. You can argue that TNN has brought back Blade Control, certainly, but not the entire blue-based SFM class of decks.

Also a separate point - as HSCK brings up, even if your assertion was true that TNN all of the sudden made these types of decks tier 1, why is that a bad thing?




Also, I may have been too harsh when stating that "I don't care". I do care and note what's happening in tier 2 (and even tier 3 if my SB cards can do some splash damage), but my main concern is how to beat the tier 1 decks. If tier 1 is RUG Delver, Elves, Storm combo and Sneak Attack, I'm going to make my maindeck and SB decisions largely based off that. I'm not going to devote 2 SB cards solely for Imperial Painter when I could use those slots to beef up my Sneak Attack matchup; if my SB card hates both decks, great!, but I'm making my decision based off what I expect to see.

Back in April 2013, I attended SCG Milwaukee. I was on Vidi's GP Denver EsperBlade list and I anticiplated seeing RUG Delver (tier 1), Reanimator/TinFins (DTB at the time), Blade Control (tier 1 at the time), and Sneak and Show (tier 1 at the time). I was aware that other tier 1 and tier 2 decks existed, but thought my maindeck was solid enough for whatever, but those matchups I wanted to focus on, so I SBed accordingly.

I played against Esperblade, TinFins, Maverick, RUG Delver, Goblins, Eggs (yep), Burn, Belcher, Dredge. I metagamed correctly for tier 1 and saw 3/4 of the tier 1 decks in my rounds. The other decks I played due to losing (lost to RUG Delver and I deserve to play against Burn I suppose). My maindeck was solid enough to wreck Maverick, Burn, Eggs, Belcher, Esperblade.

EDIT: Great article about TNN, format diversity (perhaps a natual ebb and flow, perhaps not), etc. http://www.channelfireball.com/articles/december-2013-legacy-metagame-analysis/

Also, as I stated in the other thread, TNN mirrors are just plain unfun for me. If others enjoy having TNN races, great, but I don't. I play with TNN (UW Stoneblade) and against it all of the time and it's far less enjoyable when I win on the back of TNN.

You may have seen 3/4 of the decks you were metagaming against, but that also only made up of 3/8 of the decks you played against. I think moreso than any other format, Legacy is one where you need to pay attention to non-Tier 1 decks.

Again, while what you're saying is fine, it doesn't have anything to do with the discussion of streaming coverage not being representative of a tournament's metagame.

[Arsenal]

Had I won all of my tier 1 matchups, I trust that I wouldn't see any/many tier 2 decks moving forward at that point. Also, nobody goes into a tournament where real money is on the line with the thought "I'm going to lose and face a bunch of tier 2/3/4 decks". I went in with the "I'm going to win this sucker" mentality and SBed accordingly. Obviously, it didn't work out for me, but there's no way you'll ever be able to convince me to pay more attention to tier 2/3 than to tier 1; tier 1 dictates what everybody else can and can't do, not the other way around.

Also, were all those UWR decks running SFM? I recall that many of them were going for the straight tempo plan and didn't include SFM.

EDIT: Went back and looked at the UWR lists and not all of them ran the SFM version. I'd also argue that UWR Delver (SFM or not) was a deck long before July 26-28th 2013. Dustin Taylor top 8'ed a February SCG Open with this: http://www.tcdecks.net/deck.php?id=10138&iddeck=73863. Also, if you read this forum's UWR Delver thread (originated right after SCG Edison), you'll see that I was posting about this deck in the beginning pages too, long before July 26-28th 2013.

EDIT: Hahaha, going back and reading everyone's posts in the beginning are funny. Mystic was bad back then because it didn't gel with the gameplan. Now? It's the best thing you can be doing with TNN.

[Esper3k]

Had I won all of my tier 1 matchups, I trust that I wouldn't see any/many tier 2 decks moving forward at that point. Also, nobody goes into a tournament where real money is on the line with the thought "I'm going to lose and face a bunch of tier 2/3/4 decks". I went in with the "I'm going to win this sucker" mentality and SBed accordingly. Obviously, it didn't work out for me, but there's no way you'll ever be able to convince me to pay more attention to tier 2/3 than to tier 1; tier 1 dictates what everybody else can and can't do, not the other way around.

Also, were all those UWR decks running SFM? I recall that many of them were going for the straight tempo plan and didn't include SFM.

EDIT: Went back and looked at the UWR lists and not all of them ran the SFM version. I'd also argue that UWR Delver (SFM or not) was a deck long before July 26-28th 2013. Dustin Taylor top 8'ed a February SCG Open with this: http://www.tcdecks.net/deck.php?id=10138&iddeck=73863. Also, if you read this forum's UWR Delver thread (originated right after SCG Edison), you'll see that I was posting about this deck in the beginning pages too, long before July 26-28th 2013.

EDIT: Hahaha, going back and reading everyone's posts in the beginning are funny. Mystic was bad back then because it didn't gel with the gameplan. Now? It's the best thing you can be doing with TNN.

Oh certainly, you aim for the Tier 1 decks. What I'm saying though is that in Legacy, you have to pay more attention to the Tier 2 ones than in other formats due to 1) the larger viable pool of decks we have 2) people's propensity to play their favorite deck / deck they own. A Tier 1 deck in Standard might make up 40% of a tournament. In a Legacy tournament, making up 15% of the field is high for any deck.

I'm not certain how many of the Patriot decks listed on TCDecks were SFM ones (too lazy to go back and look through the individual data), but I'd guess that the majority of the ones post Smith/Fabiano's big win were SFM lists, especially the ones we see in September-November.

I do also recall it being a pure tempo deck, but without SFM as well in it's early iterations. I don't remember it really taking off until SFM became a commonly accepted part of the list though?

It -is- hilarious how much hate people had for SFM back then (really shows how slowly the Legacy community tends to adapt to change, like Tarmogoyf, Delver, etc.). And now that we have TNN, equipment (and SFM by default) is what really makes it scary.

[Koby]

I for one, welcome our new True Named Nemesis overlords. It means less Stifle for me to Storm trigger on them. Nice Trained Armodon, bro!

[Aggro_zombies]

Oh certainly, you aim for the Tier 1 decks. What I'm saying though is that in Legacy, you have to pay more attention to the Tier 2 ones than in other formats due to 1) the larger viable pool of decks we have 2) people's propensity to play their favorite deck / deck they own. A Tier 1 deck in Standard might make up 40% of a tournament. In a Legacy tournament, making up 15% of the field is high for any deck.
Indeed.

The difference between Tier I in Standard and Tier I in Legacy is that the latter decks tend to be in that spot at least in part for their ability to power through most of the Rounds 1-3 Randoms. Legacy Tier I decks tend not to get nearly as inbred as Standard decks can be simply because you will always have to brave the first few rounds of random shit, and if your deck is strong and consistent enough to handle that you will not be in contention for top eight.

The other side of that dynamic is that it's much more possible to metagame in Standard than it is in Legacy. If 70% of the tournament is going to be on one of several known Tier I decks, you can make something a little more narrow and still expect to do well. In Legacy, your glass cannon has got to survive the early rounds, and if you have one randomly bad matchup to some deck that hasn't been good for years or whatever you can find yourself playing in a very different "metagame" than what you'd prepared to fight - stuck in Randoms hell for the rest of the tournament. That's why it's almost always better in Legacy to play a Tier I deck and just muck with the sideboard than to try to bring in something outside the Tier I or Tier 1.5 decks.

That also has implications for cards like TNN that drop right into existing Tier I decks. Sure, you could run something like Pox and have a decent chance against a resolved TNN, but then you're on Pox, and it's not clear that you have a decent match against, well, all the other random shit you have to battle through to get to the top tables and their TNN Mecca. Those messed-up metagame dynamics of Legacy end up amplifying the warping effects of powerful cards, particularly in the big, high-profile tournaments that many players rely on for metagame information and discovery of new tech. It can be a very negative spiral.

[Technicolor Mage]

I think we should give 2 months or so for the meta to adapt and then formulate opinions. Now is way too soon ;)

^
This.

Everyone who can is trying to jam this card in their decks so of course were seeing a lot of them and not all the good answers to it yet. Give it time, allow the meta games to adjust. Only then will we be able to determine if the card is indeed too powerful for the format.

It certainly has the format all in a buzz, I do find that somewhat funny.

[Hof]

Legacy can adapt to anything. I think the better question is if the format that emerges as a result is healthier and more enjoyable than before. Or, if the opposite is true. Like it was with Mental Misstep.
I am not saying that TNN and MM are the same, or that TNN must be banned.
All I am saying is that there are certain similarities.
If a significant portion of Legacy players (almost half) dislikes a powerful card enough that they would like to see it gone from the format, as this poll would seem to indicate, then that is an extremely rare event, if nothing else.

[ESG]

It certainly has the format all in a buzz, I do find that somewhat funny.

Well, you're new. You'll learn.

Two months from now, True-Name Nemesis is still going to be just as ridiculous and just as dumb. I don't see how people think that time is going to somehow alter the card. When you're playing against a Nemesis deck, you still have to beat the rest of the deck. The reason that is so difficult is because the different Nemesis decks hit you from different angles. You can build to beat RUG Delver with Nemesis, but that match plays out differently from Deathblade with Nemesis, which is also different from Bant Nemesis. We honestly haven't even reached the point where dedicated control decks play Nemesis instead of -- or, more likely, in addition to -- Jace, but I suspect we'll be there soon enough. Nemesis is just a big "I win" button more often than not, and the decks that can run it gain so much by doing so. The winning Esperblade list from SCG Oakland was running multiple Supreme Verdicts maindeck, so clearly Nemesis and sweepers aren't mutually exclusive. The best way to fight Nemesis decks will remain going over the top: Playing combo.

[menace13]

Well, you're new. You'll learn.

Two months from now, True-Name Nemesis is still going to be just as ridiculous and just as dumb. I don't see how people think that time is going to somehow alter the card. When you're playing against a Nemesis deck, you still have to beat the rest of the deck. The reason that is so difficult is because the different Nemesis decks hit you from different angles. You can build to beat RUG Delver with Nemesis, but that match plays out differently from Deathblade with Nemesis, which is also different from Bant Nemesis. We honestly haven't even reached the point where dedicated control decks play Nemesis instead of -- or, more likely, in addition to -- Jace, but I suspect we'll be there soon enough. Nemesis is just a big "I win" button more often than not, and the decks that can run it gain so much by doing so. The winning Esperblade list from SCG Oakland was running multiple Supreme Verdicts maindeck, so clearly Nemesis and sweepers aren't mutually exclusive. The best way to fight Nemesis decks will remain going over the top: Playing combo.
I agree with all of that.

You can battle TNN but it becomes a battle for equipment and who can get both off the board while having thiers active. Or in control mirros who has resolved more or the last one. What TNN does is it's god for 3 mana against creatures. Except that you don't have to build your deck around it. Your own SFM package and add TNN. There goes your main creature control and clock. Against combo it can probably be the worst card in your deck unless you need a FoW. Sideboard games it most likely won't stay in. But you can beat a combo deck with almost any clock given enough time seeing as they will never put a body down. The rest of the deck gives me that time. TNN and equipment with ways to remove it. That is what decks become centered on. It doesn't effect combo, but it will have an effect on control and aggro decks. StP now becomes worse, so do bolts sweepers will become more desired along with more counterspells and discard.

[PirateKing]

Out of curiosity, what if instead of banning TNN, they ban SFM? Not advocating this, just opening a thought experiment to everyone. Since it seems the consensus is that a 3/1 for 3 is bad in legacy, but the moment you stick a Jitte on it, it turns unbeatable. So what if ax the enabler? What would that do to the whole meta-warping argument?