Would you like to see True-Name Nemesis gone?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aggro_zombies

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 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.

---

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by btm10

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aggro_zombies

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.

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 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.

---

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

everything is ok, is not it?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 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.

---

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by humppa

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by humppa

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by humppa

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!

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ESG

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zombie

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 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.

---

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 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.

---

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Esper3k

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Esper3k

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Admiral_Arzar

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Arsenal

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
10/27/13 SCG Indianapolis Invitational Legacy Open: 1st - Bant
10/27/13 SCG Indianapolis Invitational Legacy Open: T8 (the decklist listings are messed up) - UWR Delver
10/20/13 SCG Seattle: 2nd Place - UWR Delver
10/13/13 SCG Milwaukee: 8th Place - UWR Delver
10/03/13 SCG Cleveland: 1st Place - UWR Delver
09/14/13 SCG Atlanta: 4th - UWR Delver
04/14/13: GP Strasbourg: 15th Place - Esper Stoneblade

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.

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...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 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...

---

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.

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.

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?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 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.

---

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...&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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Arsenal

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Esper3k

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...&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/artic...game-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.