Would you like to see True-Name Nemesis gone?

[Esper3k]

I like how RUG has all of the sudden become a True-Name Nemesis deck because lists are starting to run 1-2 of in the sideboard.

Also, I guess all the Jund players didn't get the memo about how TNN auto-wins against their deck.

[Feaor]

I like how RUG has all of the sudden become a True-Name Nemesis deck because lists are starting to run 1-2 of in the sideboard.

Also, I guess all the Jund players didn't get the memo about how TNN auto-wins against their deck.

I'm pretty sure any matchup is winnable if you can bring 11 cards for that matchup

[Arsenal]

Esper, I'm still waiting on your magical definition of "interaction" that seemingly no one else knows. Also, I like how you edited my post about how Basilisk is unplayable due to it's 5cc cost and it's 2 power, but hey, whatever little battles you can win, right?

[Megadeus]

If you're looking to build a creature-based deck, the only two questions that matter are "how can I best support running TNN?" and "can I beat TNN without running TNN of my own?" Obviously, this doesn't apply to combo decks as they don't care about TNN at all.

I think every deck CAN beat TNN, it is just a matter of how much of the deck do you need to devote to it.

[prateta]

Goblins was put on life support when Batterskull was printed, died when Deathrite Shaman was printed and was buried when TNN was printed. Goblins isn't a factor in the meta anymore.

Wow, you sir have no understanding of the current meta. As a long-time goblin player I can tell you - batterskull is hardly a problem for goblins. Jitte with counters is a problem, Batterskull is more likely a joke. Most lists play at least 5-6 cards maindeck to deal with it (batter). DRS? Current goblins are mostly played with W splash -> there goes 4x RIP SB, shaman becomes a bear. Plus 2-3 tarfires MD and other removal to shoot him first/second turn. And TNN? Come on, you're joking here. 3 damage per turn, cool, nice clock. But goblins are much faster. TNN + jitte? That's a problem. But again... goblins live and die with sideboard these days. And we recently got excellent sideboard cards, Wear//Tear can suck your jitte TNN all day long :-)

In current meta the biggest enemies of goblins are combo decks as it had always been. TNN is annoying, so is DRS but there are much more powerfull cards against goblins. Therefore to say goblins have been burried by printing TNN is just plain wrong and shows your lousy knowledge of legacy.

[Esper3k]

Esper, I'm still waiting on your magical definition of "interaction" that seemingly no one else knows. Also, I like how you edited my post about how Basilisk is unplayable due to it's 5cc cost and it's 2 power, but hey, whatever little battles you can win, right?

Hey, I'm just following your shining example of editing posts - one good turn deserves another. I also like how you're now trying to pretend as if you didn't believe Basilisk was playable in your post. Nice try at a dodge there, but you already got called out on that one too.

You TNN haters are already reduced to nebulous "unfun" and "uninteractive" arguments as Legacy once again shows how resilient it is as a format and adapts. I understand your need to divert attention away from the fact that the TNN Apocalypse is not upon us and I'm feeling particularly generous tonight, so I'll meander a ways down your side path.

"Interaction" is one sided. Bjholmes3 gets it. When you counter someone's spell, you interacted with them, they didn't interact with you.

Again, you never answered how "interactive" it is for your opponent when you counter all their spells and kill all their creatures. That's why most players love playing against control decks - all the interaction, right?

[Esper3k]

I'm pretty sure any matchup is winnable if you can bring 11 cards for that matchup

Links to decks that have 11 cards in the board that don't do anything except deal with TNN?

[Esper3k]

Wow, you sir have no understanding of the current meta. As a long-time goblin player I can tell you - batterskull is hardly a problem for goblins. Jitte with counters is a problem, Batterskull is more likely a joke. Most lists play at least 5-6 cards maindeck to deal with it (batter). DRS? Current goblins are mostly played with W splash -> there goes 4x RIP SB, shaman becomes a bear. Plus 2-3 tarfires MD and other removal to shoot him first/second turn. And TNN? Come on, you're joking here. 3 damage per turn, cool, nice clock. But goblins are much faster. TNN + jitte? That's a problem. But again... goblins live and die with sideboard these days. And we recently got excellent sideboard cards, Wear//Tear can suck your jitte TNN all day long :-)

In current meta the biggest enemies of goblins are combo decks as it had always been. TNN is annoying, so is DRS but there are much more powerfull cards against goblins. Therefore to say goblins have been burried by printing TNN is just plain wrong and shows your lousy knowledge of legacy.

I'm not a fan of goblins, but I do think it's a shame they don't have a goblin that can attack past a TNN for a bunch of damage.

[Arsenal]

I didn't get called out in anything you putz. I stated that a creature that doesn't die to Abrupt Decay or Lighnting Bolt while able to swing through a TNN is good. But it's bad once you find out it costs 5 mana and it only has 2 power. Read to succeed Esper, read to succeed.

And lol at all these butthurt Goblin players thinking their deck matters. Even with all of the "adaptations", you're still just above Zoo in terms of meta relevance. If Goblins is soooo good at combating Batterskull, DRS and TNN, then why are you not consistently at the top tables like the aforementioned cards/decks are? Why is Goblins not in the top 5 placing decks month in and out?

[Esper3k]

I didn't get called out in anything you putz. I stated that a creature that doesn't die to Abrupt Decay or Lighnting Bolt while able to swing through a TNN is good. But it's bad once you find out it costs 5 mana and it only has 2 power. Read to succeed Esper, read to succeed.

The part where you asked for someone to ask the Jund player how good it was in the tourney, my sides went into orbit.

[Arsenal]

So an obscure, unplayable card is played (now found out to be untrue, but I was going off of danyul's post that it was legit) in a deck that places well and asking about it's relevancy is something to laugh at?

Esper, do you even know how to read? Do your eyes not "interact" with the text on your monitor?

[prateta]

And lol at all these butthurt Goblin players thinking their deck matters. Even with all of the "adaptations", you're still just above Zoo in terms of meta relevance. If Goblins is soooo good at combating Batterskull, DRS and TNN, then why are you not consistently at the top tables like the aforementioned cards/decks are? Why is Goblins not in the top 5 placing decks month in and out?

Goblins are strong against aforementioned decks, but last time I've checked these are not only in the meta. Maybe goblins have no problems with control/tempo decks but they lose to combo and other decks? That's my case for sure. I beat canadian, TNNs, Delvers and then I lose to Belcher t1. Or elves, D&T, MUD.

Batterskull, TNN or DRS are definitely not the cards that weakened goblins and kicked them out of DTB. I guess it'd be how the whole format slowly changed. We still beat tempo and controls but we often lose to other combo or creature-based decks.

[Arsenal]

Wha? A creature deck loses to combo? Well, I never! Also, I call bs that the only reason Goblins is at Dragon Stompy relevance is due to combo.

[prateta]

Wha? A creature deck loses to combo?

Before SB... yes. After SB it's mostly fair match, depends on luck a lot.

Goblins is at Dragon Stompy relevance

You really don't like goblins, do you :-) check top8 stats from last months. Goblins did some top8 but I see no Dragon Stompy in there. However we can agree on that the deck ain't that strong as it used to be, it's still playable and can consistently defeat many of current tier 1s.

[Arsenal]

I own Goblins, I like it, but I don't delude myself into thinking it's something it's not. Also, Dragon Stompy can blow out tier 1 decks too (CotV @ 1 vs RUG Delver), but that doesn't make it relevant.

[prateta]

I own Goblins, I like it, but I delude myself into thinking it's something it's not. Also, Dragon Stompy can blow out tier 1 decks too (CotV @ 1 vs RUG Delver), but that doesn't make it relevant.

Goblins also play COTV (SB). I never said goblins are tier 1, I just couldn't agree with your statement that it was TNN/DRS/Batter what made them Tier 2.

[Arsenal]

They did (Goyf started it actually), but if you think that combo is the reason Goblins is at Zoo-level relevance, okay.

[bjholmes3]

About statements regarding TNN taking away the combat step, a part of Magic "wholly devoted to interaction of players by means of creatures":

Consider the name of the game. Magic. Implying, you know, spells, sorcery, exciting Gandalf stuff. There is much more to this game than simple creatures bashing each other's brains in (or out, as the case may be). Granted, combat is indeed a major part of the Magic experience, but so are the main phases, upkeep, and end phases, in which combat is a non-component and spells are the way battle is fought. What TNN does to the combat step, Chalice of the Void does to the rest of the turn. What have you to say about things like Silence, Orim's Chant, counters, discard, Trinisphere, etc.? These take away a part of Magic solely devoted to players casting spells and "interacting" with each other.

About statements regarding all decks polarizing towards TNN or anti-TNN:

This is getting on my nerves more and more each time I see it. OK, so combo is becoming more prevalent, sure. I'm biased on that one, being an ANT player myself, and I'm happy to see my deck back from its month long hiatus. But every time I hear some argument about how a deck is "anti-TNN" because it has flyers or because it wins by comboing out (non-combo, in this case), or that it is control, it makes me want to pull my hair out. For one, those decks were around and like that anyways, with or without TNN, and to call them anti-TNN is somewhat of a misnomer. It's like if I went into a meta of all blue with a SI deck and then stated that I warped the format because all of the decks are either combo, SI, or counter-SI. More accurately, TNN is just soft to those decks. Secondly, the meta of ANT, D&T, RUG, Patriot, Blade Control, Elves, etc. is literally the EXACT same as the meta that I started playing Legacy in months ago, before TNN ever happened. The only warping here is in the spacetime continuum, I guess.

[HSCK]

I think we should let this keep going so certain users can pontificate on how good Sylvan Basilisk is.

[Megadeus]

The card is not as warping as some people make it out to be. I honestly hate the fucking card with a passion, but the card has helped to shift the meta. I mean it is like, if maverick and other BG Strategies became prevalent, then people may run Sword of Feast and Famine in their stoneforge packages to get through KOTRs and Goyfs. Now people are running SoFaI to get through TNN. It isn't necessarily a full on warping of the meta, just a changing of the guard. I for one would like a few more maindeckable ways for decks to beat TNN, but maybe a shift of deck choice will help to curb the number of TNNs I will have to stare down. For me though? I'll just play deed and laugh at the equipment and TNN himself.