Would you like to see True-Name Nemesis gone?

[menace13]

GASP A NEW MAGIC CARD THAT GERRY T DIDN'T BLOG ABOUT !

You got all the sweet tech today. Gerry must be jealous

[Deadpool09]

It's like selling the format short if wizards banned tnn. Let the format adapt. It's a powerful card no doubt, but is it ban worthy? No. People are just riding the hysteria of the card. This is legacy, people, not modern. Trust the format, your underestimating it. Don't sell it short, the format will adapt. I'm not being biased either, I have multiple decks, some containing tnn, some not. And I don't play combos.
Btw looking at the poll, people here seems fine with it. (I know it's a small sample size, but whatever)

[Koby]

Wizards has yet to ban the Creature that broke the format. Why would they start with TNN when there are at least 3 still waiting to get banned?

(Vengevine, Griselbrand, Deathrite Shaman)

[UnderwaterGuy]

Wizards has yet to ban the Creature that broke the format. Why would they start with TNN when there are at least 3 still waiting to get banned?

(Vengevine, Griselbrand, Deathrite Shaman)

This is a very good point. That is why I don't expect TNN to get banned. wotc seems very adverse to banning any creatures.

[Dragonslayer_90]

This is a very good point. That is why I don't expect TNN to get banned. wotc seems very adverse to banning any creatures.

You're probably right. This made me chuckle a little because my friend said that Wizards would never ban a manadork when talking about if Deathrite Shaman should be banned in legacy. Thus, I don't see why Wizards would ban Troll Ascetic really.

[Pennywise the clown]

TNN is very good - no doubt about that. But looking at the decks playing it, is it really doing more damage than Brainstorm, Delver or Stoneforge mystic?
If not - then I don't really see a ban happen. To some the un-fun factor might be reason to warrant a banning but fun/un-fun is a very subjective thing. I only hope that the next big legacycard will help another archetype than bluebased midrange.

[thefringthing]

Too soon for an informed opinion. The card is certainly miserable though. Did Legacy really need a completely uninteractive aggressive blue creature that combos with Stoneforge Mystic?

[Esper3k]

This is a very good point. That is why I don't expect TNN to get banned. wotc seems very adverse to banning any creatures.

Given that this is Legacy and not Modern, I would hope WoTC does not ban a 3/1 for 1UU that doesn't do anything except block or attack (which it admittedly does very well).

[bjholmes3]

Information taken from The Council

Top Decks for November:

1. RUG Delver, 54 tops, generally doesn't play TNN, but not counter-TNN or combo
2. Patriot, 33 tops, generally plays TNN
3. Blade Control, 28 tops, generally plays TNN
4. Elves, 27 tops, never plays TNN
5. Team America, 26 tops, generally doesn't play TNN, but not counter-TNN or combo
6. Death & Taxes, 25 tops, never plays TNN, but not counter-TNN or combo
7. Miracle Control, 25 tops, never plays TNN, but not combo
8. Sneak Attack, 24 tops, never plays TNN

Out of the top 8, there are 242 decks, 181 of which do not play TNN, 130 of which are not combo. About 53.72% of the decks in this top 8 are neither TNN nor combo, with a staggering 25.21% of the top 8 containing the card at all. Also, the meta looks to me the same as would be expected normally.

[nedleeds]

Information taken from The Council


Out of the top 8, there are 242 decks, 181 of which do not play TNN. Also, the meta looks to me the same as would be expected normally.

[Dragonslayer_90]

Given that this is Legacy and not Modern, I would hope WoTC does not ban a 3/1 for 1UU that doesn't do anything except block or attack (which it admittedly does very well).

I concur. I am convinced that they should not ban True-Name on power level alone. It is damn good card, pretty stupid. But I'd rather they not set a precedent that would set Legacy on the path that Modern is already on. Let Wizards and the fans of Modern make that format as fair as they want. I could care less as long as they don't touch Legacy. I think it should only be banned if TNN decks prove too dominant, which we will have to wait and see for another month or two.

[Scott]

Whoever copyrighted "Go play Modern" as a retort is sitting on a gold mine.

[Teluin]

I concur. I am convinced that they should not ban True-Name on power level alone. It is damn good card, pretty stupid. But I'd rather they not set a precedent that would set Legacy on the path that Modern is already on. Let Wizards and the fans of Modern make that format as fair as they want. I could care less as long as they don't touch Legacy. I think it should only be banned if TNN decks prove too dominant, which we will have to wait and see for another month or two.

Exactly, which is why I wrote this on page 3 and stand by it.

I'm really on the fence about the whole thing. I definitely wish they hadn't printed the card but I acknowledge that banning it could set a precedence. If WotC does acknowledge the public outcry over this card, I hope their approach to banning it would be an intelligent one. Perhaps something similar to the ante cards - "TNN was designed with multiplayer in mind and thus shouldn't be played in a 1v1 format".

[jimmythegreek]

Dafuq did I just read? SFM makes TNN broken? A permanent that is answerable is what makes the unasnwerable permanent more broken?

Huh?

TNN is still the issue, because you can barely interact with it to begin with. Focus on the issue, not the complementary strategies.

Yes the permenant is answerable as in countering it assuming one plays blue. Otherwise one can remove sfm but the equipment is still tutored and in that players hand. I dont think people fear tnn until it gets equipped, how many decks using tnn have the creature count where a tnn would be a real threat. An equipped tnn is a real nightmare for any deck that uses creature based strategies.

[Teluin]

This thread seems to have gotten pretty repetitive.

[Dragonslayer_90]

Exactly, which is why I wrote this on page 3 and stand by it.

Sorry to be repeating your stance.

Yes the permenant is answerable as in countering it assuming one plays blue. Otherwise one can remove sfm but the equipment is still tutored and in that players hand. I dont think people fear tnn until it gets equipped, how many decks using tnn have the creature count where a tnn would be a real threat. An equipped tnn is a real nightmare for any deck that uses creature based strategies.

True, but the equipment they tutored for will take more time to set up and/or take advantage of if the stoneforge is removed. In the time it takes to set up said equipment without a stoneforge you have some turns to find or draw into answers for their equipment or for their TNN. Playing Goblins? Matron up your artifact destruction goblin. Playing Maverick? GSZ up Qasali Pridemage. Playing DnT? Postboard bring in Manriki Gusari and tutor it up with your own mystic. The list goes on. I don't mean to argue that True-Name is a card not to enjoy playing against since there are answers to equipment that makes it pretty op, but even before TNN was around many nonblue decks were packing answers for equipment.

[jimmythegreek]

This thread seems to have gotten pretty repetitive.

Yup. Dont like the card. Gonna stop bitching and play some magic.

[jimmythegreek]

Sorry to be repeating your stance.




True, but the equipment they tutored for will take more time to set up and/or take advantage of if the stoneforge is removed. In the time it takes to set up said equipment without a stoneforge you have some turns to find or draw into answers for their equipment or for their TNN. Playing Goblins? Matron up your artifact destruction goblin. Playing Maverick? GSZ up Qasali Pridemage. Playing DnT? Postboard bring in Manriki Gusari and tutor it up with your own mystic. The list goes on. I don't mean to argue that True-Name is a card not to enjoy playing against since there are answers to equipment that makes it pretty op, but even before TNN was around many nonblue decks were packing answers for equipment.

Hmm. Good point. Still, I gotta have the removal have the tutor and then play the hate. Where they play sfm then equip or simply pay to put in batterskull.

[Zombie]

Information taken from The Council

Top Decks for November:

1. RUG Delver, 54 tops, generally doesn't play TNN, but not counter-TNN or combo
2. Patriot, 33 tops, generally plays TNN
3. Blade Control, 28 tops, generally plays TNN
4. Elves, 27 tops, never plays TNN
   
5. Team America, 26 tops, generally doesn't play TNN, but not counter-TNN or combo
6. Death & Taxes, 25 tops, never plays TNN, but not counter-TNN or combo
7. Miracle Control, 25 tops, never plays TNN, but not combo
8. Sneak Attack, 24 tops, never plays TNN

Out of the top 8, there are 242 decks, 181 of which do not play TNN, 130 of which are not combo. About 53.72% of the decks in this top 8 are neither TNN nor combo, with a staggering 25.21% of the top 8 containing the card at all. Also, the meta looks to me the same as would be expected normally.

A heavy investment in fliers and indirect reach (DRS) seems to be pretty much the same as the combo plan - ignore, race, go over it - this time it just happens to be done literally. TA and D&T don't try to solve Nemesis.

Miracles is basically counters+sweepers, one of the few viable not-wonky actual solutions to TNN. Also, their win is combo or flying dudes, again completely ignoring TNN and/or racing it.

RUG is valid.

[from Cairo]

If everyone's complaint is that the biggest issue with True-Name Nemesis is the issues it causes when carrying equipment, perhaps the best course of action is to care less about the 3/1 and more about Artifact destruction? The options for taking TNN off the board are fairly limited, but Artifact destruction is handily distributed among Green, White and Red; Black has the best of the -X/-X and sacrifice effects at their disposal and Blue can interact with True Name, Stoneforge and potentially Equipment on the stack.

The format maybe needs a bit more time to adapt. True-Name Nemesis wasn't a good addition to the metagame/card pool, but I don't think it's "sky is falling" either.