Yes.
No.
It's probably the same as here.
Aaron Forsythe discussing True-Name Nemesis on Twitter: "True-Name Nemesis seems to be the talk of the town--maybe we should make a bunch more cards with that mechanic. Or not."
https://twitter.com/mtgaaron/status/403581482871967744
If you're on Twitter, send him your thoughts on the card.
Also, more confirmation that WOTC doesn't test for Legacy, so if something is overpowered, bans are really the only solution:
Jarvis Yu @jkyu06
@mtgaaron @markdash12 "am i correct in assuming you guys never test legacy (?)"
Aaron Forsythe @mtgaaron
@jkyu06 "Correct."
Oh yes, Give me a Jace or Liliana with protection from player. Some dual lands with protection from player sounds nice too.
Done.Originally Posted by ESG
I like the suggested tech of changing your name mid-game.
CML @CMLisawesome 39s
@mtgaaron get maro's weaselly shrewish ass to own up to a failure to understand what "legacy" is, much less design cards for it
But Maro didn't design TNN.
Also, if you email or tweet WOTC, it goes without saying that your feedback should be respectful and constructive.
I would consider it a fuckup, what I wouldn't assume is that it would hurt Wizards' market performance. Traditionally Wizards doesn't get hurt for a card being too good, it gets hurt for a format getting boring over a period of time. That's why they haven't emergency banned anything in the past 13+ years.
For my confessions, they burned me with fire/
And found I was for endurance made
I'm not sure why this needed to be confirmed. Not only have they stated multiple times before that they don't test for Legacy, it makes no sense for them to spend time testing for Legacy. It's far more important for them to get Standard and Limited right because those two formats see more play than every other official format combined, and if you get them wrong it's going to come back to haunt you pretty quickly. I know Legacy players are shocked - shocked - to discover that their darling isn't very high on Wizards' priority list, but I'm willing to bet you they don't even test much for Modern, Legacy's ostensible replacement format.
I still don't know why people are losing their shit over this card, aside from it being an egregious example of creature power creep. Is it so that if the card ever gets banned, people can crow about being right from the beginning? Do their pet decks lose to it? I don't know. Let's wait three to six months and see if it actually wrecks the format or if its use declines over time. Goblin Lackey, Sensei's Divining Top, and Tarmogoyf didn't wreck the format enough to warrant a ban, despite the many (many) calls for one.
Have you played with/against it much yet? I don't think that it is a problem because of the fairly high power level. The problem is that it's just boring as hell and makes matchups that previously were interactive (creature decks vs other creature decks) turn into something a lot closer to a dredge matchup where you either draw your narrow hate, or draw more TNN, or lose.
TNN hasn't proven that it is powerful enough for a ban yet and it might never be overpowered since it is so weak vs combo but when this thread's OP is "Would you like to see True-Name Nemesis gone?" my answer is definitely still "yes".
Dude seriously, but have you seen matches with this card? It transform previously much more interactive matchups into showdowns of progenitus. It's horrible to watch and horrible to play as and against. It's just stupid.
This.
After playing with and against TNN for a few weeks. I kinda like it.
There are fewer Goyf pushes and stalled board states. TNN can take an otherwise slow grindy match up and says "OK boys, the damage race is on"
This.This.
This.This.This.Have you played with/against it much yet? I don't think that it is a problem because of the fairly high power level. The problem is that it's just boring as hell and makes matchups that previously were interactive (creature decks vs other creature decks) turn into something a lot closer to a dredge matchup where you either draw your narrow hate, or draw more TNN, or lose.
TNN hasn't proven that it is powerful enough for a ban yet and it might never be overpowered since it is so weak vs combo but when this thread's OP is "Would you like to see True-Name Nemesis gone?" my answer is definitely still "yes".
The conspiracy goes deeper than you might think.Can I pay you for not posting in this thread?
I do not like the card either, but if we're using "it removes interaction and is just generally unlikeable" as a criterion for banning, I'd like to see Tendrils, Grapeshot, High Tide, Show and Tell, Belcher, and Sneak Attack go. Counterbalance too, although that one's less important these days.
If we're not talking about a ban, then I'm not sure what the point of this thread is. There's enough haterade to go around in the other thread, and probably dozens of small anti-TNN fires smoldering in other threads on the site.
I don't agree with this card is "boring"
I actually think its picks up the pace of the game. When True-Name Hits the table, no more time for durdling, its go time. Like so many things in Legacy, its answer or lose.
Its more "exciting" in that regard.
It's about as exciting as hearing a judge call "time" and that the current turn is turn zero of turns.
It does mean that the game is going to end soon but not necessarily in an interesting or satisfying way.
I admit there isn't much room for debate between our views though if you really think shorter games with less interaction is a good thing. Personally I like magic games that do go for a looooong time and require a lot of choices from both players. Obviously that's a matter of preference, I know not everyone enjoys that.
i actually think pretending to respect (or, Thassa forbid, somehow actually respecting) WotC communiqués that deserve no respect is one of several things that WotC uses as an excuse to run all over the community, though using replies to thuggish tweets as an excuse to avoid the more substantive criticism, as happened in my case, may amount to the same thing. it is most important that we not backbite but instead join in our loathing of Geist of Saint Trout, and, though I hate Progenifish, I wish we could cut it off at the source too
I've always thought it to be absolutely absurd that they don't test design impact for Eternal Magic. Am I missing something here, or is Eternal not a sanctioned variety of competitive-REL Magic?
I just think that's such a cop-out. Magic has existed for nearly twenty-one years now, and slowly but surely the non-Standard card pool (combined with the pre-8th card pool) will grow and grow. In what parallel universe does it make sense to avoid these formats given that *everything* sooner or later categorizes exclusively into Eternal?
I also believe it's ludicrous to assume that Modern is a de facto replacement for Legacy. If that were the case, given Vintage's already difficult price-barrier, what sense would it make to effectively kill all cards predating 8th? You'd have like ten years' worth of cards effectively illegal to play - unless you play in an already rare sanctioned Vintage event.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
