It's ubiquity vs stupidity. TNN is stupid, and ubiquitous. SnT may be stupid, but it's not as ubiquitous because it require a dedicated deck. TNN need islands and that's it. I hope it goes die in a fire.Quote:
Originally Posted by Barook
Printable View
It's ubiquity vs stupidity. TNN is stupid, and ubiquitous. SnT may be stupid, but it's not as ubiquitous because it require a dedicated deck. TNN need islands and that's it. I hope it goes die in a fire.Quote:
Originally Posted by Barook
Answers to S&T are also a bit broader than TNN which requires a very specific subset of cards to deal with it, of which most suck.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gheizen64
It basically comes down to something like this in fair decks:
vs.Quote:
Opponent T3: "S&T, Emrakul"
You: "Karakas, bounce/O-Ring, exiling Emrakul, etc."
Quote:
Opponent T3: "TNN, naming you."
You: "Well, fuck you, too, buddy!"
On the chess timer. It does not work as you would have to remember to hit it every time you pass priority. It just going to add yet more complexity over 10 or more games that will just get on people's nerves.
The problem is the constant passing of priority. In Chess, the question of who has priority is very simple: It's the player whose turn it is. In Magic it's much more complicated and confusing as to who should have their timer and it will have to be pressed multiple times per turn.Quote:
Originally Posted by DragoFireheart
Miracles - of course. It was still hurt by TNN in the sense that Sword of Fire and ice is in many decks and you have to kill every freaking squire immediately, but Miracles is the only "fair" Tier1 deck which has game vs. TNN decks without "raping" their MD/SB and losing edge versus other parts of the meta.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemnear
BG variants: Sure they have the tools to fight nemesis and equipments. However UW stoneblade variants were better decks than BG variants even before nemesis was printed. I think it is very hard to beat UWR and esper since although both of those decks abuse nemesis/SFM they play out quite different and it's not like they don't have good hate for BG decks. But even if you manage to get an edge over TNN decks you will just get fucked by other meta players so hard that you wonder why not just play TNN or "don't care TNN" yourself.
On NicFit, 12-Post, Jund Depths,...
I think you forgot lands, enchantress and other Tier1 decks which people should start playing because of TNN. Come on...
BUG control variants in Europe play SB Counterbalance for the combo matchups as they are soft to combo in their MB as you mentioned.Quote:
Originally Posted by catmint
Afaik NicFit IS current Tier 1 because of the numbers it puts up. Moreover I don't see a reason to not try other niche-decks to combat the SFM+TNN menace if those are favored against half the meta. I have no clue why exactly you dismiss the argument from that start.
It seems premature to talk about a ban when the meta hasn't even stopped shifting yet. A new deck won an SCG open a few weeks ago. No one has figure out which build of esper is best yet.
In the current TNN meta, NicFit certainly isn't tier 1, at least not according to thecouncil's rankings for Nov 2013 (#25), Dec 2013 (#12) and Jan 2014 (#18).Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemnear
I get what you're saying though; there are current decks that exist that have fair-good matchups versus the SFM-TNN plan. However, those decks typically aren't well rounded enough to have a fighting chance versus any form of combo (even though Storm is way down, A+B combo is way up) and those decks still aren't consistent enough to make it through 8 rounds of Swiss. Miracles is the sole exception to this as it has good game versus combo and is the epitome of consistency... not sure why it isn't doing better.
Miracle control is hard to play :
- it s a reactive deck so it is mandatory to know what to expect from the opponent
- it s a control deck so you need to be very well trained to not go to time / get draws
- it s a deck requiring a lot of decisions every turn, thus draining quite hard the pilot s energy(combined with game going longer)
All that means fewer players and even fewer successfull players.
Oh I understand what playing Miracles entails, but my point was more about Miracles having good game against SFM-TNN and combo, which is essentially the format right now. Therefore, if it was such a well positioned deck, even with it's barriers, it should be seeing signifcantly more play and/or more results than it currently enjoys.Quote:
Originally Posted by joretapo
____________________________________________________________
To whoever said that the format hasn't had enough time and is still in flux, I call bs. TNN was released November 1st, 2013 and spoiled much earlier than that. We're a few days away from February 1st, 2014, which puts us a full 3 months with TNN in Legacy. 3 months is a fairly long time for a format that sees weekly large tourneys (SCG Opens, etc) and a card pool as large as Legacy's to not find a reasonable solution.
Also, in the "Would you like to see TNN go away" thread, many pro-TNN people were pointing to November and early December 2013 data to "prove" that TNN wasn't impacting the format. If November and early December 2013 data was acceptable then, why is late December 2013 and early January 2014 data unacceptable now?
Yet another Daily event with "great diversity" - 3 TNN decks and Imperial Painter (which doesn't give two shits about TNN and can be considered an A+B Combo deck).
Note that the MODO meta evolves faster than its paper counterpart with less budget restrictions. And here we are - in a meta full of TNN and Anti-TNN decks. You either play A+B Combo which can completely ignore it, a deck that can handle TNN decks without sucking against the rest of the meta (D&T, Shardless BUG, Miracles, among a few other things) or join them. Other combo decks like Storm and non-blue midrange decks are dead. It boogles my mind how people still can say that it doesn't warp the meta.
Painter just folds to Abrupt Decay, but Abrupt Decay is way, way down right now. Perhaps that's why it's coming back on MODO?
But doesn't Painter pray on decks that run Decay, like Shardless BUG?Quote:
Originally Posted by Arsenal
When you say BUG control, do you mean Shardless BUG? All other BUG control variants had many other issues even before nemesis and I don't consider them a serious contender. Shardless has tools to fight nemesis, but they are narrow, often sideboard, more conditional/reactive compared to the TNN+equip plan. I think Esper vs. Shardless was an even fight before TNN and esper was improved significantly. In addition to that Shardless has a weaker Sneak attack, storm, Elves, Death and Taxes and random RDW matchup. So why exactly should I play BUG control again?Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemnear
On niche decks. They are viable decks and if people love them, dedicate a lot of time mastering them they can make Top8 any given day. However they are niche decks for a reason. Tier decks just have an overall better win% over the meta. So unless a niche deck suddenly becomes a tierdeck which is very rare (happened with DnT though) it is not a solution for the meta problems. Actually if it would be the case that fringe decks become tier decks and other tier decks get worse the format would change but still be healthy and diverse. But what is happening instead is that the number of Tierdecks is reduced since TNN/equipment becomes the most powerful/consistent fair strategy.
@Arsenal, I think the format did not yet have enough time - but in the negative way. I think many TNN/equipment decks will be better tuned and other decks will be pushed out more.
I was more referring to Jund. Imperial Painter's Moon effects do little against Jund when they're running basics, Deathrite Shaman (big one here), and Abrupt Decay. Also, Imperial Painter's win condition just folds to a single Abrupt Decay.Quote:
Originally Posted by Barook
But yes, Imperial Painter resolving Blood Moon/Magus of the Moon versus an all nonbasic land deck like Shardless BUG is ggpo, but so would Dragon Stompy doing that versus Shardless BUG.
I'm not experienced with Painter decks, but I thought they ran some main deck Goblin Welders to address Grips and Decays?Quote:
Originally Posted by Arsenal
These days we run 2 at most. This means that while you can use Welder to save you, we do not fetch it a lot and mostly draw into then.
Can Hypergenesis save the meta!?
Gotta love how games against the same deck can turn out:
G2: A long, great game with tons of interaction. Not a single TNN was involved.
G3: He plays double TNN. I die with a hand choke full of options which won't save me from that. No fun allowed.
At least I only played against 2 TNN decks this time, with the other decks being D&T mirror and some weird UB Omnitell deck.
Games involvingTNN aren't true magic games, they're a bland, rage-inducing parody. Hell, a board with Griselbrand, Omniscience AND JMS (while mulliganing to 4) was more beatable than this PoS.
I fail to see how it's going to resolve in a meta choke-full of blue decks. Plus, it's pretty inconsistent.Quote:
Originally Posted by DragoFireheart
Add me to list of people that hope TNN gets the ban hammer.
Even if TNN goes, it will not be while the card is still selling boxes. As much as I dislike the card too, you should not kill it 3 months into its life.
Give it another 6 months and we will see it either go or become a permanent staple.
While your argument is sound, don't forget that Mental Missstep also remained 4 months in the format.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dice_Box
That's the joke.Quote:
Originally Posted by Barook
I sort of agree here. Played a 31 person tournament. Top 8 was mostly Delver variants. The non-Delver were D&T and Deadguy (me).Quote:
Originally Posted by Barook
But yeah I agree that the meta now is TNN decks, Other Delver variants (some didn't play TNN) and decks that can go against them. Because there is so much Delver type decks out there, a lot of combo decks are pushed out. Lol, actually come to think of it Delver of Secrets is way more format warping than True Name Nemesis. But I am annoyed with TNN. Poor design, no interaction. Watching Mirror True-names are boring......seriously watching 2 Griselbrands go at it is more fun.
I'm probably not raging as some other players because of the removal options I play. I don't think you can ban it though, but I wouldn't be upset if it was. I believe someone asked Maro if they could errata TNN and he said that they aren't going to do that. I'm still really annoyed at his answer to deal with TNN, "other players". We don't have that option. thanks.
From Maro's blog:
Quote:
theverdantchef asked: When you guys announce the banned/restricted cards, who exactly is responsible for these decisions on what gets banned and not. Development?
At least we know now who's to blame.Quote:
Development, lead by Erik Lauer, is responsible.
Do we know the exact date for the announcement?
Thanks
They may announce it tomorrow 1/27/14, Monday, week of BNG prerelease.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheInfamousBearAssassin
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheInfamousBearAssassin
I can interact with those cards?
You can interact with tnn
You can misdirect spells to it
:laugh:Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord_Mcdonalds
Time to grab my playset of Misdirection before they triple in price.
....I'm trying to imagine a board state where the TNN player cares enough about your threats to play a removal spell that you could Misdirection to the Nemesis.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord_Mcdonalds
Even so, I think this stretches the definition of what's meant by interactivity. Also, this is a line of play that IMHO if it were playable would have been much more prevalent already. Wouldn't we have been Misdirection-ing all manner of StP/Bolt/etc back at, like, Geist of St Traft or for that matter, any other random threat? Misdirection stopped being a card years ago for a reason.
Also, insert requisite "ugggh best answer to Blue cards is Blue cards" whining.
sent from phone, don't be a dick
Dont get me wrong, I think TNN was a mistake and bad design, but the card shouldnt be banned.
Look at show and tell or ad nauseum. Can you cast swords to playshares on those cards? Nope. Jace bounce them? Nope. Pyroclasm? Nope. Do you usually, lose if they resolve? Yup. So how come those cards are dominating the format and demanding bans, how are we stopping those decks from winning? Either preventing them being cast (discard, meddling mage, wasteland, blood moon, etc), countering them as they are cast, or playing very narrow hate cards that stop that specific card from being effective (Humility, aethersworn cannonist, etc). The same exact thing can be said about TNN. You can't just jam a bunch of creature removal in your deck and expect to be able to interact with every deck you see.
TL;DR/Summery: Seriously, playing against cards that can't be interacted with by traditional removal is not anything new to legacy. You have treat TNN more like a combo piece if you want to interact with him: prevent him from being cast, counter him, or play hate cards.
EDIT: Also, there's tons of stuff besides misdirection that interacts with TNN. Every edict effect or non-damage based sweeper ever, skullcrack, Flamebreak, Moat, or humility just to name a few.
The fact that there are many cards that can deal with TNN does not mean that people are willing to play them (for some reason or the other). And that's what the discussion is really about. TNN is not un-fair, it's un-comfortable.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheArchitect
//EDIT: Misread Skullcrack.
Flamebreak doesn't work. Since it's a damage based sweeper under your control.
Infest and Deluge both do well. The problem for a lot of this stuff is the exact moment when I equip SoFI. That pretty much does it. Now only Deluge works, and I have a 3 turn clock.
Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk
Deluge sucks in my opinion. As exciting as it may appear (easy color requirements/hits almost everything/CC3 for CB) it can get very risky against aggro. You have to make sure that they won't recover from the board wipe which is quite hard considering most aggro strategies are fairly redundant in legacy. Furthermore, getting it countered against RUG has to be one of the most frustrating plays right now.Quote:
Originally Posted by Secretly.A.Bee
Who is playing aggro? It's pretty solid vs gobbos and elves to my knowledge. Sucks vs merfolk but otherwise, I don't see the problem.
Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk
It does not work like that. You can not simply include narrow hate cards and expect to be successful against TNN. Apart from the fact that most colors do not have any reliable maindeckable answers of any kind anyway, you can not simply approach TNN like a combo card. Combo decks have choke points that can be exploited. TNN decks (any of them) do not. Look around. Are players of top finishing decks really making poor choices with regards to TNN or is it just a shitty card to have to account for? Is the card actually simple to handle, and we are all fucktards? Or is it more nuanced in a format with dozens of top performing decks? Can you just include narrow hate or will your Red Elemental Blasts sit in your hand while a Batterskull kicks your ass? TNN is not unbeatable. But it is a plague on fun and the weak-ass medicine for it tastes like shit.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheArchitect
For starters, because Show and Tell and Ad Nauseam require you structure your entire deck around them, whereas True-Name Nemesis can just be plopped right into your deck without requiring you to really change anything.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheArchitect