Would you like to see True-Name Nemesis gone?

[Megadeus]

Also the difference in Zoo and Goblins is that Goblins has a higher number of people playing the deck right now. And it still can take down a tourney given the right MUs as can any T2 deck.

[Lord Seth]

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

While Goblins is Tier 2, it's quite a bit above Zoo in terms of meta relevance. Merfolk would probably be a more accurate comparison than Zoo.

[ESG]

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

Incidentally, Trinisphere was restricted in Vintage because of reducing interaction, so your comparison is close in a way.

The official explanation from Aaron Forsythe in 2005:
"Trinisphere is a nasty card, no bones about it. It does ridiculous things in Vintage, especially combined with Mishra's Workshop. As I've said in a previous column, we almost restricted it before it was even released.

Now that it has been floating around for a while, the Vintage crowd understands that the card does good things for the format, and bad things to the format. While it does serve a role of keeping combo decks in check, it also randomly destroys people on turn one, with little recourse other than Force of Will. And those games end up labeled with that heinous word—unfun. Not just “I lost” unfun, but “Why did I even come here to play?” unfun. The power level of the card is no jokes either, which is a big reason why I don't feel bad about its restriction.

Vintage, like the other formats with large card pools, always runs the risk of becoming non-interactive, meaning the games are little more than both players “goldfishing” to see who can win first."

Interaction and fun were key metrics in the decision, not tournament dominance, as some people think all banned cards must achieve.

[Nielsie]

I am a big fan of Goblins but I am sorry, the moment Max Tietze stopped playing it and now Jim Davis writing articles that it's time for something else, I get the memo...

Again, I feel like repeating myself. The big problem with TNN is not TNN itself, it's not TNN with Batterskull, it's TNN with Jitte. This combination is so deadly against aggro and non-TNN midrange. Sure you can load up on equipment hate but that does not take away that many strategies against Jitte that worked before are now for the garbage bin. You can't block with a goblin and in response blow it up with Skirk Prospector or Siege Gang anymore. You can't rely on Incenerator anymore. You will face a lot more boardwipes than before. I don't see how this is healthy for Goblins and other non-TNN midrange strategies. Not to mention many players falling back on combo to ignore TNN.

[dontbiteitholmes]

Incidentally, Trinisphere was restricted in Vintage because of reducing interaction, so your comparison is close in a way.

The official explanation from Aaron Forsythe in 2005:
"Trinisphere is a nasty card, no bones about it. It does ridiculous things in Vintage, especially combined with Mishra's Workshop. As I've said in a previous column, we almost restricted it before it was even released.

Now that it has been floating around for a while, the Vintage crowd understands that the card does good things for the format, and bad things to the format. While it does serve a role of keeping combo decks in check, it also randomly destroys people on turn one, with little recourse other than Force of Will. And those games end up labeled with that heinous word—unfun. Not just “I lost” unfun, but “Why did I even come here to play?” unfun. The power level of the card is no jokes either, which is a big reason why I don't feel bad about its restriction.

Vintage, like the other formats with large card pools, always runs the risk of becoming non-interactive, meaning the games are little more than both players “goldfishing” to see who can win first."

Interaction and fun were key metrics in the decision, not tournament dominance, as some people think all banned cards must achieve.

There is a big difference between the lack of interaction in TNN and the lack of interaction in a turn 1 3sphere where the opponent often never casts a spell for the entire game.


On another note is anyone else suspicious of the handful of new accounts that all registered at the same time and that only pop up in this thread?

[Echelon]

On another note is anyone else suspicious of the handful of new accounts that all registered at the same time and that only pop up in this thread?

Try and see if there are similarities between the writing styles, lol. Maybe it's an evil plot

[Higgs]

Incidentally, Trinisphere was restricted in Vintage because of reducing interaction, so your comparison is close in a way.

The official explanation from Aaron Forsythe in 2005:
"Trinisphere is a nasty card, no bones about it. It does ridiculous things in Vintage, especially combined with Mishra's Workshop. As I've said in a previous column, we almost restricted it before it was even released.

Now that it has been floating around for a while, the Vintage crowd understands that the card does good things for the format, and bad things to the format. While it does serve a role of keeping combo decks in check, it also randomly destroys people on turn one, with little recourse other than Force of Will. And those games end up labeled with that heinous word—unfun. Not just “I lost” unfun, but “Why did I even come here to play?” unfun. The power level of the card is no jokes either, which is a big reason why I don't feel bad about its restriction.

Vintage, like the other formats with large card pools, always runs the risk of becoming non-interactive, meaning the games are little more than both players “goldfishing” to see who can win first."

Interaction and fun were key metrics in the decision, not tournament dominance, as some people think all banned cards must achieve.

Very nice post. For me, the TNN meta and games involving TNN became so much unfun to the point of thinking "why am I playing this?", I started fooling around with EDH lately. I just don't feel like partaking in this nonsense.

[dontbiteitholmes]

Look if you guys don't like TNN and think it's uninteractive that's fine, but seriously don't even try comparing it to turn 1 Trinisphere. Not even close.

[Bed Decks Palyer]

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

Maybe (s)he has protection from monitor?

Also, I dislike how MWS crowd feels the urge to write a note "you" on their TNNs. Like, you know... who else should be chosen? "TNN has now protection from your dog!" Or maybe from some other pair of players on the other server?
I guess these are the same trolls/morons that loved to EOT open their Autumn Willows to tapped-out opponents. I loved to immediatelly play Contagion on their 4/4 and then watch them redden with anger.

Look if you guys don't like TNN and think it's uninteractive that's fine, but seriously don't even try comparing it to turn 1 Trinisphere. Not even close.

all I got from ESG's post is that he showed us an example of card ben banned becasue it's unfun. It has nothing to do with 3ball-TNN similarity in power level, it's about cards been banned coz they suck at been funny. Am I right?

[Feaor]

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

I never said that all 11 cards were specifically to deal with TNN, but the 2nd place Jund list plays 11 cards in the board which can be brought in to deal with TNN or Equipment. Now I don't actually know his sideboard plan so I'm not sure that all of those cards come in, but I would guess that the four cards that are obviously in the board to deal with TNN (Charm, Edict) and the 3 blasts and then probably at least one of the Grudges. Now most of these cards are flexible enough that they are reasonable to good in other match ups but I think its pretty clearly his sideboard is setup to beat the TNN + SFM decks, heck even his main deck is setup to fight TNN better, it drops Bolt as it does nothing against TNN for IoK to have more ways of potentially dealing with it preboard. Also in the 5th place Jund list played 5 cards to deal with TNN and then its has things like Blasts and Grudge for that match up as well. He's also got a main deck LftL so I'm guessing his plan in g1 was to try and Waste lock them so they can't cast TNN. I think its pretty clear that these Jund lists are set up to beat the TNN decks which is pretty crazy since they should be naturally good against fair blue decks.

[BVB09]

Maybe the problem is not TNN and it's Jitte?
TNN in Merfolk seems fine. He is a Merfolk, and it's reasonable that he's a good inclusion for a Merfolk deck.
However, most of you say that's the problem is when it's combined with equipment. Most of us agree that a indestructible 3/1 is not a problem on it's own. (That's why it only sees play in UWx decks with equipment and Merfolk with Lords and Phantasmal Image) (Only a few UGr bring 1-2 on the SB, a terrible decision in my experience, and Team America has stopped running them)
Do you think TNN + Battersull is the problem? Probably not, Batterskull is already a good card by it's own. It they can play 9 mana to SFM, lay Batterskull and equip it, they probably deserve that 7/5 don't you think?
TNN + Swords of X and Y are a problem? I doubt it. I think those are fair equipments, they are slow and with the exception of SoFI they don't have unfair efects. An equiped Mirran crusader is probably more devastating.
The real problem is Jitte. I would say the problem in fact is SFM, which shuts down a LOT of fair aggro decks. Having 5 copies of Jitte maindeck it's quite a problem for creature decks.
No one likes Jitte, even less with the rules change. I think Jitte is oppresive, unfun, and yes, VERY interactive. But I can't be the one who prefers an uninteractive 3/1 for 3, than a really interactive card for 2 that makes you lay down in your sit and wait for a miracle.
Am I the only want how thinks Jitte is the problem? I read this thread often but I haven't checked every post.

[Echelon]

Meh, Jitte is too easy to hate out to be worth a ban. And this comes from an Elves-player.

Sure, TNN or Mirren Crusader + Jitte is a nasty combination, but still... It's only a creature with an equipment and probably won't hit the board in that form until turn 4 or even 5. Seriously. Jitte is a great equipment, but not Skullclamp-broken.

[dontbiteitholmes]

all I got from ESG's post is that he showed us an example of card ben banned becasue it's unfun. It has nothing to do with 3ball-TNN similarity in power level, it's about cards been banned coz they suck at been funny. Am I right?

Yeah again you can't really compare the unfun of a 3/1 pro-you creature to the unfun of never being able to play a spell for a game of Magic that lasts 5+ turns.

As an occasional Vintage MUD player I can say with some certainty that turn 1 Trinisphere almost feels like an autowin unless they are playing the mirror or Dredge. I almost feel bad when it sticks because it certainly doesn't seem like fun for the other person.

[Higgs]

Yeah again you can't really compare the unfun of X to the unfun of Y.

I think you are aware that this is pure personal opinion.

[HSCK]

I never said that all 11 cards were specifically to deal with TNN, but the 2nd place Jund list plays 11 cards in the board which can be brought in to deal with TNN or Equipment. Now I don't actually know his sideboard plan so I'm not sure that all of those cards come in, but I would guess that the four cards that are obviously in the board to deal with TNN (Charm, Edict) and the 3 blasts and then probably at least one of the Grudges. Now most of these cards are flexible enough that they are reasonable to good in other match ups but I think its pretty clearly his sideboard is setup to beat the TNN + SFM decks, heck even his main deck is setup to fight TNN better, it drops Bolt as it does nothing against TNN for IoK to have more ways of potentially dealing with it preboard. Also in the 5th place Jund list played 5 cards to deal with TNN and then its has things like Blasts and Grudge for that match up as well. He's also got a main deck LftL so I'm guessing his plan in g1 was to try and Waste lock them so they can't cast TNN. I think its pretty clear that these Jund lists are set up to beat the TNN decks which is pretty crazy since they should be naturally good against fair blue decks.

You forgot your amazing Basilisk tech....

I'm pretty sure they were doing similar things anyway, those Jund lists aren't all that off from what they've been for months. And oh no, there's a new good card, and they added a couple SB slots, definitely ban material.

[Feaor]

You forgot your amazing Basilisk tech....

I'm pretty sure they were doing similar things anyway, those Jund lists aren't all that off from what they've been for months. And oh no, there's a new good card, and they added a couple SB slots, definitely ban material.

I don't know why I even bother, you're pretty blind if you don't see a noticeable shift in deck construction post TNN. The various TNN decks are still obviously the best decks in the format, they've been pretty much crushing stateside, they've only lost won tournament with 100+ players so far and made the finals in every tournament so far.

[HSCK]

Of course the meta has changed, no one's arguing that it's a bad card and wouldn't change the meta, but it's not warping the format to unhealthy levels...at least statistically. When you go out of you way to defend Sylvan Basilisk as a real card because of your distaste for TNN it's easy to see who plays Legacy and who doesn't.

[Feaor]

Of course the meta has changed, no one's arguing that it's a bad card and wouldn't change the meta, but it's not warping the format to unhealthy levels...at least statistically. When you go out of you way to defend Sylvan Basilisk as a real card because of your distaste for TNN it's easy to see who plays Legacy and who doesn't.

And I thought the Source would be full mature people but it turns out its the same elitist manchildren as every other online forum, nice Ad Hominem by the way, trying to discredit anything I say by bringing something irrelevant.

[Esper3k]

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

The way you squirm and wiggle trying to make it seem like you didn't fall for the obvious trolling is hilarious. Keep up the faith though, maybe someone will believe you! Maybe one day, our new TNN overlords will sweep across the format like a watery blue plague and then you can go out onto the street holding up the cardboard sign you have ready to announce the apocalypse is upon us... and SYLVAN BASILISK is our Savior!

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.

It's really just a difference of degree for the same thing when people talking about "warping" vs "shifting". At which point does one become the other?

all I got from ESG's post is that he showed us an example of card ben banned becasue it's unfun. It has nothing to do with 3ball-TNN similarity in power level, it's about cards been banned coz they suck at been funny. Am I right?

Where did the quote on the banning mention fun? It said it was ridiculous, not unfun. In context, as others have pointed out, 4 Trinispheres in a deck that runs 5 Black Lotuses and has numerous other ways to generate 3+ mana on T1 in a format primarily focused on 0-1 drops is indeed very ridiculous. You're trying to compare -that- to TNN?

I never said that all 11 cards were specifically to deal with TNN, but the 2nd place Jund list plays 11 cards in the board which can be brought in to deal with TNN or Equipment. Now I don't actually know his sideboard plan so I'm not sure that all of those cards come in, but I would guess that the four cards that are obviously in the board to deal with TNN (Charm, Edict) and the 3 blasts and then probably at least one of the Grudges. Now most of these cards are flexible enough that they are reasonable to good in other match ups but I think its pretty clearly his sideboard is setup to beat the TNN + SFM decks, heck even his main deck is setup to fight TNN better, it drops Bolt as it does nothing against TNN for IoK to have more ways of potentially dealing with it preboard. Also in the 5th place Jund list played 5 cards to deal with TNN and then its has things like Blasts and Grudge for that match up as well. He's also got a main deck LftL so I'm guessing his plan in g1 was to try and Waste lock them so they can't cast TNN. I think its pretty clear that these Jund lists are set up to beat the TNN decks which is pretty crazy since they should be naturally good against fair blue decks.

Trying to say that cards that deal with equipment, REBs, or additional Edict effects are purely because of TNN when those cards were played before is a real stretch. Sure, many of those cards got better with more people playing Equipment and Blue decks, but those cards were already good before. And really? You really think LFTL is really against TNN? Jund's game plan against a resolved TNN is more often going to be "kill all their other guys and make him sacrifice it with Liliana" or the "Abrupt Decay Jitte and race it", not relying on the 1-of LFTL to try and somehow Wasteland off of 3 mana.

You're trying to make it sound like Jund has had to change a bunch to adapt to TNN when it really hasn't. Jund is already naturally good against TNN decks due to all the built in hand disruption and Lilianas on top of the sideboard cards it already played. It doesn't have to change much to get even better against them.

[Bed Decks Palyer]

Maybe the problem is not TNN and it's Jitte?
...
The real problem is Jitte. I would say the problem in fact is SFM, which shuts down a LOT of fair aggro decks. Having 5 copies of Jitte maindeck it's quite a problem for creature decks.
No one likes Jitte, even less with the rules change. I think Jitte is oppresive, unfun, and yes, VERY interactive. But I can't be the one who prefers an uninteractive 3/1 for 3, than a really interactive card for 2 that makes you lay down in your sit and wait for a miracle.
Am I the only want how thinks Jitte is the problem? I read this thread often but I haven't checked every post.

I'm the one who thinks that the trouble with TNN is in equipments, esp. in Jitte. Also, I should have listed it in my "Top dozen Legacy cards", but I forgot about it. Btw, I like how you've described Jitte, it is very interactive card, yet it might be quite unfunny for some players.
I don't think SFM (and even less Jitte) are bannable, but the fact is that five Jittes make the aggro decks dead. Otoh, should I mourn this? We're playing Legacy.
Also, Jitte or not, TNN design is stupid. But I don't mind the card... yet. Maybe in future! But for now I don't care of this Troll Ascetic.

Yeah again you can't really compare the unfun of a 3/1 pro-you creature to the unfun of never being able to play a spell for a game of Magic that lasts 5+ turns.

As an occasional Vintage MUD player I can say with some certainty that turn 1 Trinisphere almost feels like an autowin unless they are playing the mirror or Dredge. I almost feel bad when it sticks because it certainly doesn't seem like fun for the other person.

"Protection: monitor" again?

Why do you quote me? I wrote that I think that ESG wrote about 3ball to make an example of card been banned becasue it's unfun.
Nowhere I made any comparison between power level and brokeness and unfun factor of both.

Reading. It's da tech. Since liek for ever.

You're trying to compare Trinisphere to TNN?

Troll elsewhere, child. Oh, and welcome to my ignore list.