I don't think R&D cares (or needs to care) that much about how cards will affect Eternal formats because the card pool is large enough to compensate for any new cards.
I have faith that people will adapt and it will just become another card people will have to deal with like Abrupt Decay, Deathrite Shaman, and Supreme Verdict.
This.Originally Posted by Esper3k
Also, looking at the GP results, it seems to me that Delver is still the more format-defining card, with 13 out of the top 37 decks running a playset. I think it's just been around long enough that people accept it as part of the landscape.
I think the biggest thing is the deep seeded emotional understanding that the right play is the right play regardless of outcomes. The ability to make a decision 5 straight times, lose 5 times because of it, and still make it the 6th time if it's the right play. - Jon Finkel
"Notions of chance and fate are the preoccupation of men engaged in rash undertakings."
Delver has this small difference with TNN. Namely, that you can kill it with just about everything ever. TNN, it's a small handful of cards or you just race.
So... what? I mean, isn't the measurement of how problematic a card is how oppressive it is to the metagame? Delver is usually U for a 3/2 flier. That means its basically an auto-include in blue aggro/control lists that are not named Merfolk. Nemesis is a bit harder to cast and goes in fewer decks. (Quite frankly, there's a very good case for Delver, Brainstorm, and Force as being overly dominant in blue decks and restricting realistic deck choices. For a variety of reasons, though, they ain't goin nowhere anytime soon, and thats probably fine.)
If you're saying Nemesis is worse because it's not interactive (on the axes on which you are used to interacting) then, well, it's part of the Show and Tell / Sneak Attack / Natural Order / Tendrils of Agony / Empty the Warrens club. So what? That's not a problem -- that's Eternal, baby.
Except for Modern, which can suck a big one.
That's true, but Delver is also much cheaper, so it fits in more decks, comes online faster, still has evasion, and is just as fast of a clock with almost zero investment. Delver single-handedly revived the tempo archetype, and it hasn't left the top tables for what...two years now? I mean it's been as prolific and warping as Tarmogoyf, and I don't think that's going to change any time soon. TNN is actually a great compliment to Delver in the same way that Mongoose or Tombstalker or Geist is, drop your early beater and protect it with taxing counters to eat a good chunk of their life, then drop the come in with something much harder to remove to finish the job.
Does that make TNN as fair or more fair than Delver? Not really, but I find all the doomsdaying a little ridiculous when something like Delver is just a fact of life.
I think the biggest thing is the deep seeded emotional understanding that the right play is the right play regardless of outcomes. The ability to make a decision 5 straight times, lose 5 times because of it, and still make it the 6th time if it's the right play. - Jon Finkel
"Notions of chance and fate are the preoccupation of men engaged in rash undertakings."
This is something that people don't quite seem to get. Nobody had a problem when RUG used Natural Order to get a 10/10 out. Instead of a 10/10 for 4 it's just a 3/1 for 3. I really don't see what the big deal is? It's an unfair card that easily goes into fair decks. What's wrong with that?
Regardless poor design of TNN I would rather have a format with a 3cc hard to deal with creature than a 1cc 3 power flyier.
Actually, I believe True-Name Nemesis is played in more of the Tier 1/1.5 decks than Delver of Secrets does. Could be wrong though.
Many small things, I think:
- Higher casting cost.
- Have to sacrifice a creature, eating into chumpblocker resources. It's card disadvantage. Extra Edict vulnerability.
- Is a sorcery, so many better counters available, Duress hits it.
- Progenitus' flavour is pretty nice, and having such an amazing being be amazing just feels right. Contrast with Supergood Thing That Just Happens To Be Blue Again For No Damn Reason #27354.
- It's not blue, and requires some commitment to green (and preferably to manadorks specifically due to the high casting cost) due to the additional cost. Also, if it's stuck as clunk in hand, doesn't pitch to FoW.
- Killing their dudes helps sabotage convenient Natural Orders.
- You can draw Progenitus.
- It's a combo, which makes the uninteractivity feel less offensive than it being packaged into a single retarded card.
- NO-Pro is enough of an investment to not be able to occupy the Goyf slot. TNN can.
EDIT: I'd like to clarify that my initial comment about Delver's murderability was in response to it being accepted. It's just easier to accept something stupid if I can interact with it. I did not try to claim it was less format-defining, though the original comment probably could be read that way. Apologies for the confusion, if any.
I think it depends on how you're counting. A larger variety of decks might be running TNN, but outside of Bant you see it mostly as a 2 or 3-of, whereas Delver is basically an auto 4-of, so in sheer numbers at top tables I think it's still ahead. That may change as more decks try to tweak their lists to accommodate TNN, but I think the trend will stay the same, TNN more widely played, Delver played in higher numbers.
I think the biggest thing is the deep seeded emotional understanding that the right play is the right play regardless of outcomes. The ability to make a decision 5 straight times, lose 5 times because of it, and still make it the 6th time if it's the right play. - Jon Finkel
"Notions of chance and fate are the preoccupation of men engaged in rash undertakings."
Delver's auto-4-of-ness has more to do with it's role than the objective quality of the card. It's meant to be played turn one, and to do that with maximum consistency you need four copies. TNN is a fine card midgame but not super exciting in the opener simply because of it's casting cost, so 2-3 is a very sane number.
TNN probably will not see as much play as Delver in the foreseeable future. But the problem is this:
- TNN requires you to have a small set of answers, which previously saw relatively little play because they were too narrow. Alternatively, you can just ignore it by having more TNNs or comboing off in a way that ignores TNN.
- Delver of Secrets may be too OP for a 1-cc blue creature, but it's relatively easy to deal with. It sees play in tempo decks that interact very much with their opponents (and hold combo in check).
Combo certainly has a place in any good format, including Legacy, but TNN pushes the metagame towards less interactive decks.
If the format slows down because of TNN, wouldn't there be a resurgence of control? What's wrong with that? Seems like it would be a good idea to maindeck Supreme Verdict.
I really like Humility as an answer to it. If I read TNN correct, he has to get rid of your Humility before he plays his TNN. You choose the opponent when it enters play, not when you cast it. So if you land your Humility first, and he then plays a TNN before he blows up the enchantment, he ends up with a 3/1 dork which does nothing.
TNN is an "as this enters" ability like clone effects, not a triggered ability, so you still choose the opponent. It'll lose the protection ability as long as humility is on the battlefield, and then regain protection from the chosen player when humility is gone.
Will the format necessarily slow? If TNN primarily takes the role of finisher in Aggro-control decks, I would think the pace would stay roughly the same. He doesn't put down as much damage per turn as Geist or Tombstalker, but unblockable + untargetable I think generally gives opponents less time to find the narrower/more expensive answers.
At this point, I'd agree that Supreme Verdict looks like the best answer, just because all these decks running TNN also have an aggressive counter-suite to protect him/Delver. I, for one, will be running 1-drop Zoo with Fight to the Death...and losing.
I think the biggest thing is the deep seeded emotional understanding that the right play is the right play regardless of outcomes. The ability to make a decision 5 straight times, lose 5 times because of it, and still make it the 6th time if it's the right play. - Jon Finkel
"Notions of chance and fate are the preoccupation of men engaged in rash undertakings."
Wtf? Is it just me or did MaRo basically say 'Yes, we will ban this thing, it doesn't belong into two player formats!!"? :D :O :D
Aside from that, I fear, they will let it be for about half a year before they ban it to see what happens, just like they did with Mental Misstep. Also, it won't look so suspicious that way as if they just added it to sell the packs.
It's not going to be banned. It's going to fluctuate in price for a year, maybe two and settle somewhere above $30 and become yet another blue staple in competitive eternal.
Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk
Using this logic there is nothing wrong with mental misstep. I mean we already have force of will which counters anything for free and mental misstep goes in all those same decks. What's wrong with that?
Apparently...a lot.
I think examining why mental misstep was banned is probably going to illuminate this issue better than anything else because mental misstep was not more powerful than anything else we have in legacy but it got the axe. Why? Think about it, in many ways TNN is similar to mental misstep.
To not thirst for power is to be at the mercy of those that do
Now for some more Q&A from Maro:
mazerin asked: Was True-Name Nemesis created for Leacy, because it is really bad in multiplayer commander but really amazing in Legacy?
Rosewater: It was created for Commander and then costed with Legacy in mind.
(http://markrosewater.tumblr.com/post...-because-it-is)
nicponim asked: Does True Name Nemesis violate/irritate color pie?
Blue is allowed protection from non-color things. I think protection from a player is a bit pushed so it stretches the color pie (and is not something blue should do very often) but I don’t think it’s a violation.
(http://markrosewater.tumblr.com/post...tate-color-pie)
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Reply With Quote