Printable View
Wizards knows how people feel about TNN so I doubt SFM would get the axe over TNN just because TNN is in newer product. Maro made a post on his blog about this earlier this month. Plus people are pretty upset that a Legacy card has basically made it impossible to track down the Grixis deck, its even worse than Scavenging Ooze/Flusterstorm last time around.Quote:
Originally Posted by Aggro_zombies
That's fair, and really not a lot of time was given for the format to potentially adjust. I feel like the biggest point of contention is that cards like Pithing Needle, Disenchant, and Extirpate were great against the card Survival of the Fittest but extremely poor against the other 56 cards in their deck (which was basically Maverick).Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemnear
Anyways, whether or not the previous format could have actually battled Survival is rather moot now because the current slew of hate fights not only the Survival itself but the entire GW shell that it was placed in (RIP, Terminus, Deathrite, Abrupt Decay, etc).
I mean, current Jund lists pack anywhere from 6-8 cards in the sideboard that are clearly for the TNN matchup. I suppose they could just start running those cards maindeck in order to "adapt" to the TNN-meta, but then they just lose even harder to other stuff? I don't think that's healthy if a Jund player has to seriously contemplate maindecking his narrow sideboard hate in order to "adapt".
I'm actually quite suprised how fast TNN decks completely wrecked Jund on MODO. I was looking up if Jund was still doing reasonable well in the online meta, just to see it vanished into nothingness:Quote:
Originally Posted by Arsenal
http://www.mtggoldfish.com/metagame/legacy/full
I don't play Jund, but it appears that TNN decks absolutely violate Jund, making the claims that Jund is an anti-TNN deck pretty funny.
The absence of Jund also explains why D&T is more popular than ever on MODO since it's one of the few decks that can fight off TNN decks while having a horrible match-up against Jund (and Elves, which are suprisingly absent as well).
Maverick isn't going to be seen anywhere anytime soon until it gets now toys which make it suck less in the current meta. It has way more problems than just TNN.
Interesting side fact: Imperial Painter seems to perform extremely well in that given meta. Too bad Recruiters are still horribly expensive in paper, even with the Judge promo.
The thing with painter is that you have only proactive answers and not reactive ones. I should look at maybe Meekstone again and run etut in the side. Maybe I can build something that is custom to this situation.
I am not a fan of this Meta and I am thankful that since the GP has come and gone here, people are willing to convert back to pet decks. That brings to mind and interesting question. At your local store, how many people try and keep up with the trends and how many play pet decks? We may just find another "Gentlemen's agreement" if people just go back to pet decks.
I played those cards in Can Thresh, I had three Snares main, some number of Needles in sb (maybe three?) and at least two KGrips plus some gravehate (I'd guess three Crpyts or something liek that). But the problem was that...Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemnear
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dzra
Our store is mixed. Half play sneak and Show, Stoneblade and whatever. Half brew random stuff. One week I might play against sneak abd show, Blade, and reanimator, the next I'll play vs Tezzeret Stax, Meekstone Stompy, and Reanimator Pox
Jund is abosultely fine against TNN.
Punishing Fire engine kills the other dudes.
Liliana kills the TNNs.
Discard handles stuff that would mess with Junds plan.
Bob and Sylvan draw more gas.
Decay kills equipment.
Charms from the side kill TNN.
REBs from the side counter TNN.
Seems like Batterskull is the real problem.
EDIT: Wait, you were having trouble with a GW version of Vengevinal???
I remember casting Ad Nauseam against those. And killing them.
We used to encounter UG versions that were quite annoying, but GW?
Come on, you can beat an improved Maverick! What are you guys playing? Highlander?
Our shop is similar, but it's a little bit divided:
There are players who own one or two decks (like I do) and they come with them on each Thursday and pit against each other.
Then there are players who have nothing but bad claptrap and these lend decks from a guy who has like sixteen decks (like I had) and those play with whatever bone he throws them.
Very funny.
Batterskull isn't a new card and Jund could just thrive fine during its existence. The tournament data clearly indicate that Jund can't perform well anymore in a TNN meta, be it online or in Paper.Quote:
Originally Posted by Asthereal
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arsenal
I have 3 main issues with your data. One is that these decks existed before TNN, so while they got an upgrade for some cards they're not fundamentally different. The second is that some blue decks that run them don't run the full four. The third is that some blue decks that could definitely use them to great effect choose not to use them altogether. If they're so good why not run the full four everytime?Quote:
Originally Posted by Arsenal
Huh, what? This isn't true.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemnear
Here's a deck from before TNN. 2 MMs, 2 Canonists, 3 Blasts, no Flusterstorms.
Here's a deck from after TNN. 4 MMs, 3 Blasts, no Flusterstorms.
If other people are adding Flusterstorms or running more hatebears(since, you know, attacking from 1 angle-this case being counters, isn't the best thing to do) that's well within the realm of normalcy for SB change.
Not that it has been doing poorly. Multiple combo decks took top8 in the last couple of Opens.
Combo being a response to it is not a bad development. Combo is a good and accepted pillar of archetypes. It(non Show and Tell) was doing poorly to mediocre before TNN. Chalk that up to a benefit of TNN warping.
Jund being less played isn't necessarily a bad thing either. When a metagame changes some decks are lost(though Jund isn't lost, just less effective), that's part of the deal. Some are also gained, like Jund-Depths or an increase in combo decks.
It's better than Geist for sure, but Souls still sees play as a 1-3-of in addition or replacement of TNN. Tombstalker has not been replaced in all lists.Quote:
Originally Posted by catmint
True unfortunately.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemnear
Statistics mess up reality, like I said earlier.Quote:
Originally Posted by Barook
Oh no, latest results show Jund is bad against something. Let's stop playing it!
Or maybe we grow a set of brains and start testing. Adapting. Making sense, for a change.
If we're start pointing our fingers at SFM/Equipment, I'd say Jitte is probably a wiser ban than SFM/Batterskull. Jitte is always good with or without SFM. No other Equipment have such a potential impact on the game if its carrier connects to the defending player just ONCE. I think we'd see more creativity among lists with SFM in them, like seeing more Swords of X&Y MD, or Manriki-Gusari in the SB to deal with those Swords.
So true...Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemnear
There is always a public enemy: specialy if that card implies deep changes in decklists.
Have you tried a build with Ensnaring Bridge in the main?Quote:
Originally Posted by Dice_Box
Yes, but its not always easy to drop what is in your hand at a fast enough speed to stop a Jitte equipped creature from getting tokens. Once they do Painter is not likely to stay long. Still its worth running and I do. Thanks for the post.
1.) Pre-TNN, you could only call Patriot a true meta player as Blade Control and Deathblade were way, way down. I went through this already in a different thread, but here's the data: (http://www.mtgthesource.com/forums/s...l=1#post772437).Quote:
Originally Posted by 2Rach
The fact that Blade decks existed as a Magic: The Gathering deck pre-TNN is irrelevant as they weren't nearly putting up the results they are post-TNN. If they were all top tier before TNN (which my data shows they weren't), you'd have a point there. But alas, they were not, so you do not.
2.) Ever notice that decks only run enough TNN as they do Equipment? Patriot runs 2 maindeck Equipments and 2 TNN. Blade Control is generally on 3 maindeck Equipments and 3 maindeck TNN. You don't need to run the full 4 because you're not going to be able to have 2 TNN both equipped with Jitte in play or 2 TNN w/ 2 Batterskull equipped to them. I can't believe I even had to point that out.
Also, there are many decks that do not run a full playset of a card, even though that card is a defining, pivotal piece. Jund runs 3 Bloodbraid, AnT runs 1 Ad Nauseam, etc. Your argument of "unless it runs 4, it isn't a TNN deck" makes no sense whatsoever as TNN is clearly the primary mechanism of all of these decks' success. Again, look at the tourney results for all of these decks pre-TNN and post-TNN, it's almost night and day.
3.) Every deck that can maximize TNN's potential is currently doing so. Every deck running blue and SFM is running TNN. As UR Burn and Team America has learned by now, TNN w/o Equipment sucks, but ONLY because it's very likely facing off against an opposing TNN w/ Equipment. If the best thing you can do is resolve TNN, then what better way to trump your opponent's TNN then to Equip your TNN with Jitte? Oh that's right, there is no better strategy which why people have been CRUSHING with the TNN-Equipment plan.
The only deck that will run a full set almost all the time is Fish. That's because the deck has a very different game plan (swarm not equip) and it has no deck manipulation. All the others can fall back on the redundancy of Blue's deck manipulation and SFM to get the job done.
Not this shit again.
First, let me say Golgari Charm is bad as an answer to True-Name: it only works if he isn't pumped up, which if they get a chance to equip Batterskull to him, you're out of luck.
Having said that, I believe the anti-TNN crowd is severely unwilling to adapt. Citing the death of aggro is ridiculous as aggro hasn't been a major contender for awhile. Citing the death of non-blue decks is slightly less ridiculous, as while they are indeed on the decline, they're doing stupid crap (running Bolt for removal in addition to Punishing Fire+Grove of the Burnwillows in a TNN+SFM-heavy meta; using the aforementioned Golgari Charm as opposed to Pernicious Deed, Damnation, or Toxic Deluge).
Granted, this doesn't solve the consistency or versatility issue with non-blue midrange. But I believe it's time for something fresh: non-blue or splash-blue control. Nic Fit is perfectly positioned in this meta in my opinion, particularly those that can answer Stoneforge Mystic and/or Batterskull (TNN is easy to beat by itself for Nic Fit because it runs maindeck sweepers with potentially more in the sideboard).
Still, the more I think about it, maybe banning this wouldn't be that bad of an idea. It'd be nice if they printed the following as a replacement:
True-Name Watchwolf - 1GW
Creature - Wolf
Hexproof, Protection from Creatures.
3/3
Essentially the same except vulnerable to Pyroclasm, but in colors that could benefit from it.
You need two Pyroclasms to kill it, though.Quote:
Originally Posted by EpicLevelCommoner
You'll hear that bullshit about how It's not a TNN deck a lot. And it's true. If That makes it any better that the "not a TNN deck" decks took an upgrade with TNN and slotted it in while continuing along their regular game plan unimpeded...Quote:
Originally Posted by Arsenal
I'm not sure why this surprises anyone. When TNN was spoiled, my first thoughts were "oh this will be great against all of those GBx midranged decks that rely on Abrupt Decay and creatures to beat other fair decks." TNN doesn't make Jund a bad deck per say; GBx verses Stoneblade was always a close match. Attrition verses CA. Goyf verses SFM. Deathrite verses Snapcaster. Bloodbraid/Shardless verses Batterskull. True-Name Nemesis just pushes Stoneblade over the top.Quote:
Originally Posted by Barook
This is really very similar to how Survival hate worked back in the day. Golgari Charm and Liliana are great against True-Name Nemesis... in a vacuum. It's just too bad that those cards are total trash against the rest of a deck that is packed full of x/2s, 4/4 recurring Germs, and a ton of soft permission. Before TNN, Jund and Shardless had one simple task against Delver decks: get enough mana to cast your superior spells. In addition to that, they now have to add in: find some way to kill this nearly unkillable monster before it gets equipped because then it really is going to be unkillable.
I'm sure that ANT or any combo deck would have preferred to see the non-FoW version, but against the majority of the field (including but not limited to all the other Survival decks) the GW version was much more resilient while still packing just as much explosive potential.Quote:
Originally Posted by Asthereal
Again, I'm not saying ban anything, least of all SFM/equipment for crying out loud. I wish they'd errata TNN, but if they aren't willing to do that then I'm still not ready to see a banning yet.
I think an errata for TNN to an ETB seems very interesting and full of much more interaction.
Imagine:
1) Stoneblade players wants to play TNN. Jamming it on Turn 3 into an open BGx player means it could get STP'd, Bolted, etc.
2) BGx player hates to see TNN around, and has to keep mana open to kill it in response. Otherwise, TNN is going to be the pain it is now.
3) Tempo decks running Stifle get to have an opportunity here as well.
There's more meaningful ways to try and next level your opponent. Do I cast my bomb or keep mana open to nuke TNN? Do I jam TNN against my Jund opponent hoping they don't have it?
The card will still end up being good because you're a blue deck playing counterspells, but there's a lot more leveling going on that I would definitely enjoy, very similar to the "Opponent plays Jace TMS against a deck that may have Bolt. Do I fateseal to protect or Brainstorm to profit?"
-Matt
Wizards doesn't do power level errata anymore, people should stop suggesting that.
I would look at it more as an errata for intent. Perhaps I'm being naive, but I don't believe TNN was intended to be as non-interactive as it is within a 2-player game. Progenitus is one thing. Invisible Stalker is another. In multiplayer TNN makes perfect sense and can even be considered flavorful. In 2-player games, a hexproof, unblockable, three powered, protection from all forms of damage creature for :1::u::u: strikes me like it must have simply been an oversight.
Then I would argue that TNN is probably going to get banned some time in the next 6 months from Legacy, because decks that were merely middling have got a considerable boost from TNN's introduction, to a point of dominance, if not yet the point of dominance that VengeSur decks got to. Or Mirrodin-era Clamp decks.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheInfamousBearAssassin
Born of the Gods is complete and my only hope for a changing metagame is the B&R update on 3.Feb ... so sad
Edit: WotC found a way to make Money off the Legacy crowd with the Commander Set which has a gigantic print run. There is no chance that they'll ban the only selling argument of those set. I rather expect it becoming a Judge promo than being banned.
SFM and S&T may be the only cards on the watch-list atm, but I doubt any bannings are required. Earthcraft off the list ... that's all
S&T doesn't put up the numbers to be ban-worthy.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemnear
While I can see Wizards being stupid enough to ban SFM, it doesn't address the problem why the format went haywire. Stoneforge was fine before TNN and by removing Nemesis, the format can go back to normal where your ground forces aren't dead in the water against a goddamn fish. One could draw parallels with SotF, but Survival had several ways to be broken and was repeatable, while SFM is a one-shot tutor.
Tinker, demonic tutor, vampiric tutor, mystical tutor...all these one shot tutors. Are any fair? Not even remotely. SFM is innocuous but in terms of where it it powerlevel wise of cards printed in the last 10 years I can think of 2 cards that outclass it. Jace, the mind sculptor and skullclamp. The card is absolutely incredible at what it does and is one of the most played cards in legacy for a reason.Quote:
Originally Posted by Barook
Mystical tutor didn't put up enough numbers to be banworthy and look what happened. Yes, it was bad for the metagame no doubt about it. But numbers wise no it wasn't there. The same can be said of show and tell. Doesn't put up numbers, but is it good to have in the metagame? No.
I guess that their excus is that SFM is a Demonic Tutor for just a limited number of targets and fail to realize that it's Demonic Tutor and Aether Vial and Felidar Sovereign. :rolleyes:
If TNN costed green or white mana no one would call for a ban.. Anyway you guys are prob right: they wont touch it till the grixis deck stock is sold. Lol
Maybe they will free earthcraft. I just wish survival back ;(
I wish WotC would make up its mind. If WotC is not going to ban it then fine, I'll buy some. But, if they are, I'll wait for the price to drop. Not getting burned again like with SotF.
All I want is to unban Chrome Mox and/or Wild Nacatl in Modern. Legacy is fine right now.
[troll]Quote:
Originally Posted by barcode
"Why do you want to play a watered down Legacy lite when you could play the real thing?"
[/troll]
TNN is toxic for the legacy. Period.
You're singing the same old song that others were in the "Would you like to see TNN go away" thread, claiming that Jund will do well versus TNN because of it's potential answers. I then provided a fairly detailed analysis as to why your threat-answer theorycrafting hasn't translated to real world success and even provided data showing that Jund is essentially dead thanks to TNN. Yet you still claim that Jund is "absolutely fine". Wow.Quote:
Originally Posted by Asthereal
Just to illustrate my point and to show how laughable your position is, here's data from thecouncil on Jund's death:
January 2013 - 2nd Place
February 2013 - 2nd Place
March 2013 - 4th Place
April 2013 - 3rd Place
May 2013 - 6th Place
June 2013 - 4th Place
July 2013 - 5th Place
August 2013 - 2nd Place
September 2013 - 8th Place
October 2013 - 6th Place
That's a 4th place average for the 10 months pre-TNN. Also, Blade decks were way, way down during that same time period. Jund was CRUSHING Blade style decks pre-TNN, Batterskull most certainly wasn't/isn't "the real problem".
November 2013 - 12th Place
December 2013 - 11th Place
January 2014 - 25th Place
That's a 16th place average for the 3 months post-TNN. Unsurprisingly, Blade decks are way, way up with Patriot and Deathblade running away with the #1 and #2 spots for January 2014, respectively. Yep, seems like Jund is doing "absolutely fine" against TNN. Thanks for playing :laugh:.
I re-read the last few pages of this thread and nobody ever said anything about TNN killing pure aggro strategies. Care to quote who said that? Also, if you look at sideboards, people are running Pernicious Deed, Toxic Deluge, etc in an attempt to combat TNN. However, the general consensus on that (read the Jund thread since November) is that it's often going to harm your board just as much, if not more sometimes, than your TNN opponent. Jund gets there with creatures and reach (although not even reach if you're advocating Jund dropping Lightning Bolt and Punishing Fire from the maindeck). So in your Jund build, you literally are a creature deck running maindeck Toxic Deluge, Deed and Damnation... lolwut?Quote:
Originally Posted by EpicLevelCommoner
If you Deed for 3, you definitely hit their TNN and maybe other stuff that didn't already die to Punishing Fire/Lightning Bolt/Ancient Grudge/etc, but you also just took out your own Sylvan Library, Deathrite Shaman and Goyf. Damnation? If you're okay with Wrathing away your own Bob and Goyf in order to get their TNN and Snapcaster (that has already Flashbacked for value), cool. If you have an empty board and they have stuff you can Damnation for value, awesome, but you weren't applying any pressure with your empty board, so they were winning regardless. The TNN player will have Brainstorm and higher card quality than Jund, so by Jund playing these one-shot 3-4cc Sorcery speed spells (hoping they resolve), you really just are playing into the control aspect that TNN decks are able to effectively assume.
I don't understand what your definition of "adapting" is. I sure hope you don't mean playing narrow, context-specific sideboard cards like Ancient Grudge and Toxic Deluge maindeck. That isn't "adapting", that's a card warping the format. Running maindeck Lightning Bolt is "stupid" according to you, but running a narrower sideboard card like Damnation (which obliterates your own gameplan in your theoretical all-creature, no-burn Jund build) in it's place is next-level "adapting"? Sure thing pal.
I don't think it's anything to discuss with TNN. It's a card that I don't like, even as a Merfolk player
But the probabilities of it getting banned are 0, at least in this update. It's absolutely imposible that WotC would ban a card that they have just realeased in a suppemental product specifically for us.
We will have to "adapt" for at least 3 more months...
If WotC thought TNN was too powerfull/dominant (which I don't think it's the case) they would ban SFM, Batterskull or Jitte, only to weak it a bit.
But banning it? I'm sure that won't happen, at least until 3 months time it's not worth discussing.
They don't take us in consideration when looking at the B&R list anyway, I expect another boring announcement with no changes. Look at Time Spiral or Land Tax, they have been there for ages and they represent 1% of the metagame.
WotC banned Mind's Desire before the set was released.Quote:
Originally Posted by BVB09
Nothing is impossible.
I know, but they probably didn't make the card for Legacy. And it was part of a complete set.Quote:
Originally Posted by DragoFireheart
This scenario is much diferent; if there is an only reason to buy their product is TNN.
Also, looking for example at MaRo statements, they don't feel TNN has been so bad. I think their feeling about the card is diferent to ours.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BVB09
Ok, which is it? Did they make TNN for Legacy or not?Quote:
Originally Posted by BVB09