Would you like to see True-Name Nemesis gone?

[Julian23]

I just wish we would see something als healthy as Zoo come back. While it was originally pushed out of the format by Maverick (which also is great against Merfolk, one of Zoo's best matchups), there's really not that much of a point in playing it anyways.

[lordofthepit]

I just wish we would see something als healthy as Zoo come back. While it was originally pushed out of the format by Maverick (which also is great against Merfolk, one of Zoo's best matchups), there's really not that much of a point in playing it anyways.

I had been playing Zoo for a while this year. Ever since TNN became legal, I have not touched it.

[Esper3k]

A lot of the "unfun" criticisms mirror those that were expressed about Trinisphere. Power level is obviously a different metric. I have also seen people playing TNN grumble or apologize when they drop it into play or say something to the effect of, "This is so dumb." This is similar to your niggling of unpleasant feelings when you drop a Trinisphere and lock your opponent out. I've never heard anyone apologize for blasting someone with a lethal Tendrils on Turn 1 or playing a Turn 1 Show and Tell or playing a Turn 1 Blood Moon, even though these plays all effectively made those games into Solitaire. People actually find True-Name Nemesis more disagreeable and more unfun than those scenarios, which is why they make an in-game apology like that.



Posting it again and bolding it for you, Esper3k.

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."

He is citing two reasons for the card's banning: "Unfun" to play against and power level. One of these is widely regarded to apply to True-Name Nemesis. Power level is the issue that people are more divided on, with some feeling that the card is overpowered and others feeling it is not overpowered.

Fair enough, I apologize for missing it the first time.

While the unfun argument is used, I would still argue that the circumstances of TNN in Legacy are significantly different from Trinispheres in Vintage. I also still believe the "unfun" argument is extremely subjective and best not used, which modern banning philosophy seems to tend to stay away from.

[Barook]

I also still believe the "unfun" argument is extremely subjective and best not used, which modern banning philosophy seems to tend to stay away from.

Sure, fun and " unfun" are subjective, but alot of people feel pretty bad about TNN, otherwise this thread wouldn't be already 35 pages long.

Sure, losing against Storm combo T1 or getting a hard-lock by a T1 Blood Moon kinda sucks, but the Storm thing doesn't happen often enough to be considered "unfun" by a majority of players and BM is a calculated risk of running a greedy manabase.

Playing a fair deck and then getting fucked over by a TNN is far more likely than said scenarios. Power-level arguments aside, the helplessness of losing against a TNN might be comparable to other "unfun" situations were you can't do jackshit.

[Megadeus]

Yeah I havent played Zoo since TNN got printed either. Before hand I actually was really enjoying Big Zoo though. Now? I think it just wouldnt be that good in the meta

[Zombie]

I am sure there are people like myself who have not voted too while having a strong opinion. Personally, I want the card gone, gone but not banned. Erated to give protection from a Commander I like.

I will not vote because yes I want the card gone, but I am fearful of the precedent banning it will do. Still I hate the very precedent this card sets too.

Or you could just ban the damn card instead of dancing around the issue. The errata would be as good as banning the POS anyway, just a less clean way that doesn't offend people's precious competitive ptw player self-images.

[Arsenal]

Running TNN is a way to fight TNN fairly. As we can clearly see from GP DC coverage, the best way to beat TNN is to have one more copy of the card in play than your opponent.

I apologize for being unclear. I was pointing out that we said essentially the same thing; ignore TNN completely or gameplan around/with TNN. When I said it, I was lambasted for it. Just wanted to give you a heads up as you basically echoed my earlier sentiment.

[Finn]

This might be a dumb question, but exactly which decks are being forced out of the meta from TNN right now? I count, let's see, Jund. And that's it.

[Arsenal]

This might be a dumb question, but exactly which decks are being forced out of the meta from TNN right now? I count, let's see, Jund. And that's it.

Although it may change from now until Jan. 1st, RUG Delver seems to have been pushed out of the meta (top tier, not the entire game of Magic) (http://www.thecouncil.es/tcdecks/tie...&format=Legacy).

If you look at the previous 11 months, you'll find RUG Delver firmly planted at the top, but that changed beginning this month. It even tries to keep pace with TNN decks by running their own TNN in the SB, but I don't think that's a solid long term strategy (but does illustrate how TNN is strong arming it's way into decks).

And if you read the RUG Delver thread, I think it was anticipated (correctly) by many that TNN would be one of the ways RUG Delver just loses now to previously even-positive fair matchups (yes, this is even with running MOAR Ancient Grudge, REBs, etc).

[Zombie]

I'm somewhat surprised that Shardless seems to still be a deck.

EDIT: Going through the decklists, there's a pretty sharp uptick on sideboarded sweepers - specifically Golgari Charms and Toxic Deluges - but apart from that the decks look oddly normal, often only running 2-of Lilianas. One weirdo-build runs a singleton Sword of Fire and Ice maindeck. There's also a few TNN builds.

I guess they count on just Decaying opposing equipment because they have a bigger-than-TNN backswing, otherwise, dunno.

[saspook]

Although it may change from now until Jan. 1st, RUG Delver seems to have been pushed out of the meta (top tier, not the entire game of Magic) (http://www.thecouncil.es/tcdecks/tie...&format=Legacy).

How do you account for 3 of the top eight decklists in Las Vegas being RUG?

[Deadpool09]

Although it may change from now until Jan. 1st, RUG Delver seems to have been pushed out of the meta (top tier, not the entire game of Magic) (http://www.thecouncil.es/tcdecks/tie...&format=Legacy).

If you look at the previous 11 months, you'll find RUG Delver firmly planted at the top, but that changed beginning this month. It even tries to keep pace with TNN decks by running their own TNN in the SB, but I don't think that's a solid long term strategy (but does illustrate how TNN is strong arming it's way into decks).

And if you read the RUG Delver thread, I think it was anticipated (correctly) by many that TNN would be one of the ways RUG Delver just loses now to previously even-positive fair matchups (yes, this is even with running MOAR Ancient Grudge, REBs, etc).

You are so determined to hate tnn that youre basically saying its not ok if one of the most dominating decks in the history of the format (rug) got dethroned. Btw, rug will always be included in the decks to beat as long as the concept of tempo exist. So aside from Jund, what else did tnn obliterated completely? it feels like the haters here are a bunch of terrorist fear mongering the apocalypse that is tnn. STOP SELLING THE FORMAT SHORT. It will stabilize. It is not mental misstep. Jeezus.

[Arsenal]

How do you account for 3 of the top eight decklists in Las Vegas being RUG?

I linked to thecouncil's monthly data, which shows what's happening across the entire format, not just a single tourney. Also, a TNN deck won that SCG Legacy Open (and all 3 of those RUG Delver lists sided TNN).

Deadpool09, calm down kiddo. I didn't give my personal opinion as to whether RUG Delver dropping significantly was good or bad, I simply answered Finn's question using data from thecouncil.com. What the hell man?

[Esper3k]

Sure, fun and " unfun" are subjective, but alot of people feel pretty bad about TNN, otherwise this thread wouldn't be already 35 pages long.

Sure, losing against Storm combo T1 or getting a hard-lock by a T1 Blood Moon kinda sucks, but the Storm thing doesn't happen often enough to be considered "unfun" by a majority of players and BM is a calculated risk of running a greedy manabase.

Playing a fair deck and then getting fucked over by a TNN is far more likely than said scenarios. Power-level arguments aside, the helplessness of losing against a TNN might be comparable to other "unfun" situations were you can't do jackshit.

Sure, for some people, having to deal with a resolved TNN isn't very fun, but I don't see much of a difference between that or facing combo (when you're not running countermagic) or get locked out by CounterTop. I can definitely see the comparison with situations where you're locked out, but that doesn't mean it warrants a ban.

I'm somewhat surprised that Shardless seems to still be a deck.

EDIT: Going through the decklists, there's a pretty sharp uptick on sideboarded sweepers - specifically Golgari Charms and Toxic Deluges - but apart from that the decks look oddly normal, often only running 2-of Lilianas. One weirdo-build runs a singleton Sword of Fire and Ice maindeck. There's also a few TNN builds.

I guess they count on just Decaying opposing equipment because they have a bigger-than-TNN backswing, otherwise, dunno.

It actually doesn't surprise me that much. GB really has the best answers right now to a resolved TNN on top of being able to deal with SFM through AD and hand disruption.

You are so determined to hate tnn that youre basically saying its not ok if one of the most dominating decks in the history of the format (rug) got dethroned. Btw, rug will always be included in the decks to beat as long as the concept of tempo exist. So aside from Jund, what else did tnn obliterated completely? it feels like the haters here are a bunch of terrorist fear mongering the apocalypse that is tnn. STOP SELLING THE FORMAT SHORT. It will stabilize. It is not mental misstep. Jeezus.

Jund made a pretty big showing at the Invitational this weekend too. Even so, Jund was on the decline well before TNN was printed, most likely due to the rise in popularity of Sneaky Show.

I linked to thecouncil's monthly data, which shows what's happening across the entire format, not just a single tourney. Also, a TNN deck won that SCG Legacy Open.

Deadpool09, calm down kiddo. I didn't give my personal opinion as to whether RUG Delver dropping significantly was good or bad, I simply answered Finn's question using data from thecouncil.com. What the hell man?

Again, as others have pointed out, I don't really how you can call a deck that played 2 TNN in the main and one in the board really a "TNN deck". Wilson's deck is a Delver deck first and foremost.

[Esper3k]

How do you account for 3 of the top eight decklists in Las Vegas being RUG?

The data from TCDecks hasn't been updated yet for the Vegas Open results from what I can see. I would expect RUG and Jund to probably move up in the standings after their T8's.

[Arsenal]

So if a deck doesn't run a full playset of a card, you disregard the impact of that card? It isn't "TNN enough" for you? I give you data how the penetration of TNN is very real, but my data isn't good enough because players opted not to run a playset of TNN?

There are many decks that don't run a playset of a card, yet those decks are clearly associated with that card. ANT doesn't run a playset of Ad Nauseam or Tendrils. Miracles doesn't run a playset of Terminus or Entreat. Jund doesn't run a playset of BBE.

[Machahiko]

I just wish we would see something als healthy as Zoo come back. While it was originally pushed out of the format by Maverick (which also is great against Merfolk, one of Zoo's best matchups), there's really not that much of a point in playing it anyways.

Delver of Secrets killed Zoo. Why play 3/3 guy that can be punished by wastelands when you can play 3/2 flying guy with no drawbacks? Wild Nacatl also forces you to play Naya colors, while Delver can be paired up with anything thanks to being blue and having brainstorm and all the other cantrips. : )

It's not like I'm bitter or anything...

[Scott]

You are so determined to hate tnn that youre basically saying its not ok if one of the most dominating decks in the history of the format (rug) got dethroned. Btw, rug will always be included in the decks to beat as long as the concept of tempo exist. So aside from Jund, what else did tnn obliterated completely? it feels like the haters here are a bunch of terrorist fear mongering the apocalypse that is tnn. STOP SELLING THE FORMAT SHORT. It will stabilize. It is not mental misstep. Jeezus.

It's frustrating to see people who don't like TNN being labeled as people who are bitter that their deck is less well-positioned, people who never want to see decks rise and fall in general, or both. My favorite deck has always been the TNN-boosted Mono Black, I love seeing RUG Delver get beaten, I think that no deck is entitled to their tier status, and I still think that TNN is unhealthy.

You're taking a silly tack. It would be like me telling you that you sold the format short for not thinking the format could stabilize after Mental Misstep, or telling you to play Yugioh because you obviously like mindless games like TNN games. Both are unfair and unproductive.

It's not just about decks being pushed out. Some Tier 2 decks/approaches stand no chance in matchups they should, a few Tier 1 decks/color have been pushed ever higher at the top, and there's homogenization. I see that Brainstorm was in 52% of decks in 2011, 62% in 2012, and 70% in the last two months.

A lot of people welcome decks going up or down but don't welcome the format adjusting in an unhealthy way to something seen as bullshit.

[Esper3k]

So if a deck doesn't run a full playset of a card, you disregard the impact of that card? It isn't "TNN enough" for you? I give you data how the penetration of TNN is very real, but my data isn't good enough because players opted not to run a playset of TNN?

There are many decks that don't run a playset of a card, yet those decks are clearly associated with that card. ANT doesn't run a playset of Ad Nauseam or Tendrils. Miracles doesn't run a playset of Terminus or Entreat. Jund doesn't run a playset of BBE.

Sure we're seeing more TNNs getting played, as is expected whenever any powerful card enters the format. Whether it's dominating or not is up for debate. For some, such as myself, the numbers do not warrant a concern.

Decks are often named after the signature card or mechanic of the deck. AnT could also very correctly be labelled a Storm deck. Miracles does tend to run more than 4 Miracles and often does run 4 Terminus between the sideboard and main. Miracles could also be correctly labelled as a CounterTop deck.

However, taking a UWR Delver deck, slapping 2 TNN into the main and 1 in the board in place of the Geists... and now suddenly it's a TNN deck? The main gameplan of killing your opponent with Delver while keeping them off balance still hasn't changed. The TNN is there for when your primary plan goes wrong. It's like calling Max Brown's OmniTell deck a "Jace deck" because it had 2 JTMS in it.

Mislabelling decks to try and make TNN look more menacing doesn't add anything to the discussion.

[Arsenal]

TNN isn't a card you build an entire deck around. You simply slap it into existing strategies/decks and watch them work exponentially better than before. You can continue thinking Blade Control, Patriot, Bant and Deathblade are just Delver/SFM/DRS/GSZ decks, but they are all just trying their best to support TNN (mana ramping him with DRS/Noble, beating opposing TNN with SFM-Equipment, etc).

Also, a card doesn't have to be the focal point in order to be unhealthy. Mental Misstep was added to existing strategies/decks and made them all exponentially better than before. But you should be fine with that because, I mean, they weren't labelled "Mental Misstep decks", right?