-
Re: All B/R update speculation.
I my opinion tnn should not be band. I like play with and against this card, and have lost to it, won with it, Ive killed it forced opponents to discard it and swept entire boards just to kill it. I enjoy playing this card because its very powerful and pretty fun. A great card in my deck as a two of. not powerful enough to have as a four of tho...
The fact of the matter is jund and dnt still are performing well and top 8ing big tournements. Jund has 6 top 8 appearances in the last four ssg opens
In the past two months tnn played in %22.7 of decks (http://www.mtgtop8.com/topcards), and the last 4 ssg opens top 8 (32 decks) 8 of then had the Nemesis so 1/4 top 8 decks and the average. so its not dominating the meta by any means.
tnn is a fun card for me at least. I would hate to see it go.
-
Re: All B/R update speculation.
They did "say" storm, but in my mind Tendrils is the main point of contention to the claim.
Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk
-
Re: All B/R update speculation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Secretly.A.Bee
They did "say" storm, but in my mind Tendrils is the main point of contention to the claim.
Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk
I'm pretty sure it is Mind's Desire
-
Re: All B/R update speculation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Lemnear
I'm pretty sure it is Mind's Desire
That card is extremely stupid. It got banned BEFORE the set was released.
Mind's Desire
Make a Vintage deck but one where you can play four. Experience a major orgasm and drop dead.
-
Re: All B/R update speculation.
I don't even allow minds desire to be a part of my magic vocabulary. Tendrils, at one point was a bannable card. Now, not so much.
Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk
-
Re: All B/R update speculation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Arsenal
I think they actually said the Storm mechanic was a mistake, not Tendrils of Agony (which just so happens to have the Storm mechanic on it). This is curious, as this admission of making the Storm mistake came years before Flusterstorm was printed. I like Flusterstorm a lot, don't get me wrong, but it just goes to show that Wizards makes up whatever reason/excuse that's convienient for them at the time, then proceeds on like nothing ever happened.
Unlike the other Storm cards, though, you can't really build a deck around Flusterstorm, and it's a purely reactive card. It doesn't really hit any of the checkmarks as to why Storm was considered a problem in the first place.
-
Re: All B/R update speculation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
skinnytalls
Jund has 6 top 8 appearances in the last four ssg opens
Now you're just making stuff up. The most recent 4 SCG Opens:
SCG Columbus (http://www.tcdecks.net/deck.php?id=12694) - ZERO Jund decks in the Top 16.
SCG Orlando (http://www.tcdecks.net/deck.php?id=12653) - ONE Jund decks in the Top 16.
SCG Indy (http://www.tcdecks.net/deck.php?id=12597) - ZERO Jund decks in the Top 16.
SCG Las Vegas (http://www.tcdecks.net/deck.php?id=12428) - TWO Jund decks in the Top 16.
That's a total of THREE Jund decks in the Top 16 of the most recent 4 SCG Opens... combined. This is the 2nd time I've provided data on the death of Jund post-TNN, but people still refuse to accept the data as reality and live in some fantasy land where Jund still matters and is making all of these Top 8 finishes. Cool.
-
Re: All B/R update speculation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
DragoFireheart
That card is
extremely stupid. It got banned BEFORE the set was released.
Mind's Desire
Make a Vintage deck but one where you can play four. Experience a major orgasm and drop dead.
I agree. The day WotC makes the stupid decision to unban or unrestrict Mind's Desire, I'll break the respective format in a half within 2 weeks.
-
Re: All B/R update speculation.
http://mtgtop8.com/archetype?a=301&meta=39
I think he was using this as the data point.
-
Re: All B/R update speculation.
How many Death and Taxes decks were there in those recent tournaments?
-
Re: All B/R update speculation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
HSCK
Then he should stop using incorrect data? It's not my fault he didn't source properly. The SCG Invitational is not the same as a SCG Open (you know that, he may not though). Also, even if we weren't seperating the two, I only count five top 8s in SCG events, not the claimed six. So again, making stuff up.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
EpicLevelCommoner
How many Death and Taxes decks were there in those recent tournaments?
Three, just like Jund. Because why would you want to play Jund and D&T and lose to TNN when you can just play TNN and win? At least D&T still has great game versus combo like Sneak & Show, so it has that going for it I suppose. Jund just loses to combo and now loses to midrange decks (even though Jund is designed to beat them).
-
Re: All B/R update speculation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Arsenal
srry three decks i saw was jund depths and junk depths in there. should of taken more time on that.... my bad
-
Re: All B/R update speculation.
Yeah, the Invi is diff. Prior to last week though, TNN was definitely ebbing, isn't that a sign things are the way they're supposed to be? UWR Delver only runs 2 a piece so in Orlando's top 8 there were 4, Indy had 6, Vegas had 2. People saw this, and left out whatever they were doing and it saw a resurgence in Columbus. That doesn't seem all that broken, which is really what you're aiming to ban.
-
Re: All B/R update speculation.
No one should be appealing to Invitational results anyway, because 50% of what decides those results are from the Standard format. This makes them quite useless for trying to get a gauge on the Legacy metagame... or the Standard metagame, for that matter.
-
Re: All B/R update speculation.
So we are back in the same old routine again. Joy. Lets see if I can do some summing up then.
The issues with TNN have never been it's individual power. Its a lighting bolt on a stick. Nothing fancy about that. It can Maze as well but that is not often done. No the problems arise when you add other cards into the mix. Its like a Mogwai until you add water. Then all the shit starts happening. On its own its kind of cute, add past mistakes and well...
The main push to see the card gone has always been over its design and rarely its power. This is legacy, we have seen worse cards powerwise before. But then you read the Unhinged style, bullshit ass text box on the card and you see its not a power issue, its the fact that the card itself is a joke. A total joke. And we all know it was made to sell boxes, not for EDH. No one in EDH cheered about a 3/1 with no abilities.
Then add the issues that have come from pushing non Blue decks out of the top tables. Maverick, Jund, DnT to a point too. They are all going away. It does not matter how many TNN end up in the top at the end of the day, it matters how many non Blue decks they bend over on the way there.
The real crime here is that if they really wanted me to buy that box, Force reprinted with the new MTGO art would have made me grab 4 too. They did not need to hand another powerhouse to blue to push sales. They can print money just fine many other ways. So stupid, so very very stupid.
Oh and one last thing, I own 4, they are in my fish deck. So me saying this has nothing to do about me not having the card. I honestly feel this way even though I have money to lose if it was banned.
-
Re: All B/R update speculation.
I don't TNN really ebbed so much as people switched to playing unfair so they don't have to slog through TNN battles. I think it was the SCG Indy Open where they asked the top 8 if they had adjusted their sideboard to fight TNN and basically everyone was either playing it or said that the deck they were playing didn't care about TNN. Its certainly not nearly as blatant as Mental Misstep and SotF but I think its a sign of format warping when a large percentage of the format is either playing TNN or electing to not deal with it and play unfair.
-
Re: All B/R update speculation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Dice_Box
Then add the issues that have come from pushing non Blue decks out of the top tables. Maverick, Jund, DnT to a point too. They are all going away. It does not matter how many TNN end up in the top at the end of the day, it matters how many non Blue decks they bend over on the way there.
This is what I've been saying and using data to show how non-blue creature decks have essentially vanished post-TNN. But despite data proving my claims, people are making things up out of thin air to support their claims. Not much I can do about magical data.
-
Re: All B/R update speculation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Arsenal
This is what I've been saying and using data to show how non-blue creature decks have essentially vanished post-TNN. But despite data proving my claims, people are making things up out of thin air to support their claims. Not much I can do about magical data.
I'd buy TNN but I got burned on SotF last time. Waiting for Monday.
-
Re: All B/R update speculation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
DragoFireheart
I'd buy TNN but I got burned on SotF last time. Waiting for Monday.
What were SotF at its height?
-
Re: All B/R update speculation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Arsenal
This is what I've been saying and using data to show how non-blue creature decks have essentially vanished post-TNN. But despite data proving my claims, people are making things up out of thin air to support their claims. Not much I can do about magical data.
I understand mate. The post was not directed at you.
-
Re: All B/R update speculation.
Maybe I'm just too cynical, but I anticipate SFM getting the axe before TNN. TNN was just printed in a product that lets them make cards specifically for Eternal formats, I doubt they'd want to ban it so soon.
Which is a pity in no small part because in the absence of TNN, SFM enables a bunch of interesting decks, from D&T to all the X-Blade variants. TNN enables frustration and a lack of interaction, which are no one's idea of a good time (except maybe whatever hardcore masochist at WotC thought TNN was a good idea).
-
Re: All B/R update speculation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Megadeus
What were SotF at its height?
40-60 or so. Ugh. Bunch of horse shit really.
-
Re: All B/R update speculation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
DragoFireheart
40-60 or so. Ugh. Bunch of horse shit really.
Damn. Well maybe I'll pick up a set hoping for it to get unbanned
-
Re: All B/R update speculation.
Mental Misstep did something similar to legacy in that a single card invalidated a bunch of archetypes. It didn't take long for decks like Storm, Elves, Goblins, etc to disappear completely as a result of that card being so dominant. I realize TNN is a completely different card but it's effects on the format are quite similar. If this card sticks around, the format will continue to degrade into a standard-like scene from a diversity standpoint.
TLDR: TNN is bad for legacy and I hope it vanishes so I don't feel forced to play it.
-
Re: All B/R update speculation.
I don't understand what else people need to see in order to consider that a ban is warranted. There's a plethora of data from December 2013 through now that clearly shows non-blue creature decks that used to compete no longer do and have been replaced by some TNN-flavor or a deck that doesn't care about anything the opponent is doing at all. Even Storm players have stated that due to TNN and everything that comes with it (having extra SB slots for combo as TNN decks now CRUSH all other fair decks without even trying) they're also way down. So, TNN has directly pushed non-blue fair decks out while indirectly pushing Storm combo out too? Yeah, format has never been healthier! :rolleyes:
-
Re: All B/R update speculation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Arsenal
Even Storm players have stated that due to TNN and everything that comes with it (having extra SB slots for combo as TNN decks now CRUSH all other fair decks without even trying) they're also way down. So, TNN has directly pushed non-blue fair decks out while indirectly pushing Storm combo out too? Yeah, format has never been healthier! :rolleyes:
This is actually kinda funny considering it does absolutely nothing to Storm directly.
-
Re: All B/R update speculation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Arsenal
I don't understand what else people need to see in order to consider that a ban is warranted. There's a plethora of data from December 2013 through now that clearly shows non-blue creature decks that used to compete no longer do and have been replaced by some TNN-flavor or a deck that doesn't care about anything the opponent is doing at all. Even Storm players have stated that due to TNN and everything that comes with it (having extra SB slots for combo as TNN decks now CRUSH all other fair decks without even trying) they're also way down. So, TNN has directly pushed non-blue fair decks out while indirectly pushing Storm combo out too? Yeah, format has never been healthier! :rolleyes:
Please don't take this personally, but this is exactly what happened when Survival got banned.
One or two months of dominance, no one bothered to adapt or hate out the dominant card.
Card gets the axe.
In Europe, Survival was strong, but by no means problematic.
I feel the exact same way about True-Name Nemesis.
It's not that dominant, there's plenty of stuff that beats it, and plenty ways to hate it out.
Just tune your deck a tad, and go kill those TNNs!
(On a lighter note, I'm not perse against banning of TNN. I don't like the card at all. I just don't like the reasons mentioned here.)
-
Re: All B/R update speculation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Arsenal
I think they actually said the Storm mechanic was a mistake, not Tendrils of Agony (which just so happens to have the Storm mechanic on it). This is curious, as this admission of making the Storm mistake came years before Flusterstorm was printed. I like Flusterstorm a lot, don't get me wrong, but it just goes to show that Wizards makes up whatever reason/excuse that's convienient for them at the time, then proceeds on like nothing ever happened.
Flusterstorm is not a problematic card, it doesn't kill anyone, and moreover, it attacks the Storm mechanic. As such, it's perfectly fine card and I'm also glad they made it. The greatest mistakes with "Storm" written on them were clearly Mind's Desire, then maybe Tendrils and maybe maybe Brain Freeze and maybe maybe maybe Empty the Warrens.
I like how Flusterstorm attacks Storm mechanic/decks from quite a different angle then counterspells, Stifle, Meddling Mage or Counterbalance (and other static stuff like CotV). Imho it's nice card and I'd love if they reprint it somewhere so that I may get a Chinese copy.
-
Re: All B/R update speculation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
DragoFireheart
This is actually kinda funny considering it does absolutely nothing to Storm directly.
We had this discussion yesterday in some thread here: the fact that you don't really need to protect SFM+TNN, freed a shitload of SB space in this deck for a full set of Meddling Mages/Cannonist + Flusterstorms + REB's ... Not REALLY good news for storm :/
-
Re: All B/R update speculation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Asthereal
no one bothered to adapt or hate out the dominant card.
Maybe because players have realized that playing TNN + playing countermagic is better than not playing TNN + playing narrow, context-specific TNN answers?
-
Re: All B/R update speculation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Lemnear
We had this discussion yesterday in some thread here: the fact that you don't really need to protect SFM+TNN, freed a shitload of SB space in this deck for a full set of Meddling Mages/Cannonist + Flusterstorms + REB's ... Not REALLY good news for storm :/
Thanks for info, I just wanted to cry about my ANT dissolution, now I see it wouldn't be pf any help to keep the deck.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Megadeus
Damn. Well maybe I'll pick up a set [of SoF] hoping for it to get unbanned
I thought about the same, but then again I realized I should rather sell more cards than buy a new ones...
*checks his MKM account on incoming crap for T 1.996*
-
Re: All B/R update speculation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Asthereal
Please don't take this personally, but this is exactly what happened when Survival got banned.
One or two months of dominance, no one bothered to adapt or hate out the dominant card.
Card gets the axe.
Except Survival was widely considered to be a fun card, even for people on the other side of the table. Its problem was that it was extremely powerful and flexible aaand resilient, and despite me hating the ban, the format at the time honestly didn't have many good ways to battle the deck. I feel like there's a good case for it being unbanned in the current environment, but that's a different issue...
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Arsenal
Making the protection-from-player a trigger instead of a static ability would've made all the difference. Still would've been highly played, but not nearly as uninteractive and board dominant as it currently is.
This. Nothing actually needs to be banned, if TNN were only errata'd to a triggered ability when it enters the battlefield then that would open up so many more points of interaction. The card would probably still be playable, but it wouldn't be the massive block of ice down everyone's panties that it is currently.
-
Re: All B/R update speculation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Dzra
This. Nothing actually needs to be banned, if TNN were only errata'd to a triggered ability when it enters the battlefield then that would open up so many more points of interaction. The card would probably still be playable, but it wouldn't be the massive block of ice down everyone's panties that it is currently.
Yep, although I'm fairly certain that MaRo has gone on record stating that it won't happen because "that isn't how we want to use errata".
-
Re: All B/R update speculation.
Btw, from a personal point of view, I'd love if they unban Frantic Search. I'm sitting on a greatest pile of Frantic Searches ever imaginable by a mere human.
-
Re: All B/R update speculation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Arsenal
Maybe because players have realized that playing TNN + playing countermagic is better than not playing TNN + playing narrow, context-specific TNN answers?
No it isn't. Play Team America with awesome Golgari Charms on side!
Fucking amazing deck! Even a terrible player like myself rides that shit to the finals. :eek:
-
Re: All B/R update speculation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Arsenal
Yep, although I'm fairly certain that MaRo has gone on record stating that it won't happen because "that isn't how we want to use errata".
I'd believe it, though given a choice of ban or errata, I'd hope they'd use errata... especially since I can't think of any legitimate reason why it wasn't just made a triggered ability in the first place.
-
Re: All B/R update speculation.
@Dzra
Countertop decks during the reign of Survival played Counterspell over Spell Snare and players resisted switching their countersuit. Rarely anyone in the SCG top 16 bothered playing Pithing Needle, extripates or enchantment removal, but rather called SotF broken and banworthy.
The format had enough ways to interact with SotF; parts of the playerbase just rather prefers whining than adjusting their deck.
-
Re: All B/R update speculation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Lemnear
@Dzra
Countertop decks during the reign of Survival played Counterspell over Spell Snare and players resisted switching their countersuit. Rarely anyone in the SCG top 16 bothered playing Pithing Needle, extripates or enchantment removal, but rather called SotF broken and banworthy.
The format had enough ways to interact with SotF; parts of the playerbase just rather prefers whining than adjusting their deck.
+1 :laugh:
I just love how Lem improves my point almost every time.
You should be a pro debater!
-
Re: All B/R update speculation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Lemnear
@Dzra
Countertop decks during the reign of Survival played Counterspell over Spell Snare and players resisted switching their countersuit. Rarely anyone in the SCG top 16 bothered playing Pithing Needle, extripates or enchantment removal, but rather called SotF broken and banworthy.
The format had enough ways to interact with SotF; parts of the playerbase just rather prefers whining than adjusting their deck.
Are you talking about playing fringe sideboard material like Extirpate maindeck? If so, then I think your definition of "adapting" is different from the vast majority of players. If you mean that these players weren't playing these sideboard cards in their sideboard, then yeah, that's dumb.
-
Re: All B/R update speculation.
I am not sure that is the same situation as we have here tho. I mean what changes are open to Mav? What about Jund? Yea Jund can use -1 abilities, but I covered a few pages back why that don't mean shit right now.
Personally I am playing more Elves and Fish now than I have in a while. One has answers, the other speed. I would rather play Painter right now to be honest but painter is dead if TNN hits the table. (And painter is like the king of dudle in combo form...)
The card is flawed. Regardless of how it could have been printed to make it fair, it was not. So it's flaws shine though and everyone hates it. Honestly though, I am apathetic. I have no belief that it will go anywhere so I just deal. But if they pull this shit again I will just cash out because I would hate to be playing the game in 3 years if this is a sign of things to come.
