The Fate of Countermagic

[Machinus]

My understanding of this mechanic is based on a few sources at mtg.com. One is the often-quoted "pendulum theory" of design. Another is the controversial "toning down" of blue as a color. And still further are actual statements to the effect that this mechanic, and Counterspell in particular, would return. None of this has anything to do with smaller formats since all of this discussion took place in a context above any specific environment.

Until a few weeks ago, I really believed that Counterspell would return to Magic. This was based on my analysis of the information presented at mtg.com and in the evolution of R&D. However, even after a long break (appeal to pendulum), and in a perfect environment (power concerns aside), and despite public opinion, R&D has not allowed this to happen.





Witness:



I believe we have seen the last of our friend Counterspell.

[Komatteru]

1) MTG Readers are dumb

2) Counterspell is too good.  That's all there is to it.  No one likes having their shit countered, and at UU, it's too powerful.  You can do too many things early and still only have to leave 2 mana up to say "No, derf, nice 6 mana investment" like an idiot.

[TopSecret]

     I hate to be a hater,
but I know a lot of Magic players that hate blue.
They just downright hate the color.
They dislike playing it, and they dislike playing against it.

     This is because Counterspell and the like are costed too aggressively.

     I understand that this changes, depending on what format
is being played. Obviously, Force of Will costs zero mana in Vintage.

     However, for everyone else, whom Wizards is printing the cards for,
it is in their best interest to make Counterspell cost more.

     Have you ever met the people that just hate playing against blue?

TopSecret

[The Chosen One]

 Have you ever met the people that just hate playing against blue?

TopSecret

I run into people on MWS all the time that say I am no fun and that counterspells ruin the game of magic.

[Machinus]

The argument that "counterspell is too good" doesn't make any sense. Magic thrived and grew for eleven years with Counterspell. Suddenly it's bad for the game? You're going to have to do better than that.

[Komatteru]

And the United States thrived and grew with slavery legal for 87 years.  Suddenly in 1863 it was bad for the country?

[ChemEng]

Theres only 1 reason why I would want Counterspell to be reprinted: it would force WoTC to create more aggressively costed environment. I got bored playing T2 because it just felt like no matter what deck I was playing, I was playing a good sealed deck. There is no reason for a bomb in T2 to cost 6 mana and be a creature. (Kokusho or Yosei). And now Simic Skyswallower is playable at 7 casting cost!!! Thats pathetic. They may feel that Counterspell is too strong at UU, but having a UU hard counterspell in the environment would be a great forcing function for the rest of their design team to work around to keep 6 mana creatures from dominating or even being playable in the format. I dont want CBS/RGD constructed, I was MVW/TSE constructed. That would further help differentiate the constructed versus sealed skill sets as well by letting constructed players to play decks worthy of constructing, and leave the sealed players to play sealed.

[wethepeople]

 Have you ever met the people that just hate playing against blue?

TopSecret

I run into people on MWS all the time that say I am no fun and that counterspells ruin the game of magic.

i too have had this experience, and on multiple occasions i have read join notes saying things like "Fun, no Counterspell". I take it that Counterspell is no fun, however in my opinion i like playing it. Without Counterspell you could do just about anything you want because your opponent would have no way to stop you, so if no one played disruption insane Combo decks with no protection would take over due to the fact they wont have to worry about a thing when going off.

I like Vintage how it is now, even if there are cards like Counterspell being used. Counterspell is certainly not "too good" or "not fun", because without them i believe that the format would be stupid with the ability for decks to play with 0 disruption, and go completely broken whenever they please.

[Machinus]

No. Wizards is really happy when even 50% of people agree with their decisions. Two thirds of magic players (besides myself) aren't going to quit playing type 2 because it's more like sealed, as ChemEng said.

[zeus-online]

I don't get why people don't like playing against counterspells? Its not like its an impenetrable wall, Watch an old-school tempest era Draw-Go! deck versus Sligh w/cursed scroll match, its not pretty.
Aggro > Control > Combo > Aggro just dosn't work without counterspells.

Am i the only one who miss the good ol' Control vs. Aggro match-up? You know suicide black/sligh versus Draw-Go! and friends?

I personally love playing with counterspells. And for the casual players, I don't see how counterspell.dec is any more annoying then 40 stone rain.dec or "all the discard spells i could find".dec.

/Zeus

[Matt]

Not having counterspell STILL didn't stop blue decks from being the best decks in standard. Wake was a blue-and-splashes deck. Goblins and Affinity meant blue was going to suck, Counterspell or not. And judging from Flores' stuff, then Jushi Blue was really good, and the U/G Critical Mass was good, and Meloku was everywhere, and then BlueTron, and URtron, and Heartbeat is U/G. Blue doesn't need Counterspell.

[TopSecret]

The argument that "counterspell is too good" doesn't make any sense. Magic thrived and grew for eleven years with Counterspell. Suddenly it's bad for the game? You're going to have to do better than that.

     Yes, but I would like to point out that for a lot of Magic's history,
blue has been thought of as the objectively strongest color.

     Also, other colors have had to play Disenchant and Terror to deal with specific threats,
while blue decks can just pay the same amount of mana to deal with any threat.

     A lot of players feel that it is fair to have a Disenchant played against their card,
but having someone play Counterspell makes them feel like it doesn't matter what card they played.

     This also leads to the whole problem of "Counter Decks", which only play counters for answers.
It is generally considered "not fun" when such strategies are more viable than other decks.

TopSecret

[Machinus]

Not having counterspell STILL didn't stop blue decks from being the best decks in standard. Wake was a blue-and-splashes deck. Goblins and Affinity meant blue was going to suck, Counterspell or not. And judging from Flores' stuff, then Jushi Blue was really good, and the U/G Critical Mass was good, and Meloku was everywhere, and then BlueTron, and URtron, and Heartbeat is U/G. Blue doesn't need Counterspell.

That's only a result of development's decisions. Counterspell was a fair card in most environments in the past, and the card didn't dominate multiple formats like many modern cards do. In environments with disruptive combo or efficient aggro/aggro-control, counterspell is just average. There is nothing inherent in the card that makes it inappropriate. I'm totally confused by R&D's conclusion that those formats are unfun and unpopular, and in fact I think the opposite is true.

If it was a purely business decision, it would be pretty logical. But given the past success of magic, I don't think it is a business decision. Current R&D really thinks magic is better now.

[Moxlotus]

Counterspell is not too good depending on the environment.  Was counterspell too good in Mirage/Tempest Type 2?  Lately Type 2 has been a bunch of BIG D00DS, not small aggressive decks.  Tempest block had mono red, black, and white weenie decks that were all viable for beatdown decks.  I liked the archetypal battales of one of those vs. Draw Go or Counter Phoenix.  I wish Type 2 would stop being all about 5-6-7 costing bombs to finish the game.  It's been like that since Onslought.

[Eddie]

Reference the poll if you like.  35% people said 2 mana is too few.  Imagine if all those people were to get fed up with a tournament setting and quit.  Is it worth cutting your business 35% to make the other 65% happier, even when those 65% are buying your product already?  Imagine if only half of the 35% quit, or even a 4th.  Losing 10-15% of your business to make some people happier just isn't a sound business practice.

Reference the poll if you like.  65% people said 2 mana is correct.  Imagine if all those people were to get fed up with a tournament setting and quit.  Is it worth cutting your business 65% to make the other 35% happier, even when those 35% are buying your product already?  Imagine if only half of the 65% quit, or even a 4th.  Losing 20-30% of your business to make some people happier just isn't a sound business practice.

[Machinus]

But there already isn't Counterspell for 2 mana, and it's been that way for 3 years.  If the people who really want that were going to quit, why haven't they already?

Actually those polls were taken right before they changed everything.

[nataz]

How many people thought that UU was appropriate because they were just used to that being the cost of counter spell for ten years or so? How many people were basing their decision on tradition rather then game theory?

Similar arguments can be said for the changes in the color pie, i.e., how many people thought disenchant should be green? I bet if you polled people 5 years ago, no one would say that, but if you asked now it doesn’t seem far-fetched at all.

[Eddie]

But there already isn't Counterspell for 2 mana, and it's been that way for 3 years.  If the people who really want that were going to quit, why haven't they already?

Actually that poll was taken a couple of years ago, right before they changed everything.

So basically you're citing evidence from 2 years ago and assuming that that opinion is still valid.  In other words, your entire argument about "public opinion" has no basis whatsoever, as
1) opinions change in time
2) the public that voted in that poll might not even be present in the current public (moved on to a new hobby, for instance)

So with point 2 you proved

But there already isn't Counterspell for 2 mana, and it's been that way for 3 years.  If the people who really want that were going to quit over it, why haven't they already?  If they were going to get fed up with a tournament setting and quit, what would inspire them to do so now instead of two or three years ago?

Anyway, the argument can always be turned. If the 65% isn't accurate anymore, so is the 35%. It could be 60-40, or it could be 70-30.

[offensive username 2]

I suppose we can say that the American public thinks that Bush is still doing a great job in office, because I can produce a poll from October 2001 that says that 65-70% of the American people approve of his actions.

If your name is sean hannity you claim this % as fact every night.

[Machinus]

The game's history is really important, as it defines the future of the game as well as the game's players. The polls are important because they demonstrate the willingness of R&D to ignore public opinion, despite asking for it. This indicates that it was not a business development, but something more closely related to R&D's understanding of what magic should be, which is different from what magic has been for most of it's existence. Clearly I am not the only person who has a positive opinion about magic's past.

[Matt]

The original explanation for the removal of counterspell from the basic set was:

1. Too many strong counters in Standard at one time is bad. No one wants to see draw-go, or even Dromar-go. At the time, blue was UTTERLY dominant. Remember the Tog/Trenches/Opposition T8 from whatever PT?
2. Counterspell is a good counter.
3. Therefore as long as Cspell is standard-legal, there is a limit to how many good counters we can print in the expansions.

So be removing Cspell, they ostensibly were able to print more strong and NEW counters. This made a lot of sense at the time but it looks like the rationale for Cspell's exclusion has changed a bit over time.

[Jacob Orlove]

It's a lot like how Ritual moved from the base set to the expansion sets, and then several years later they realized it was too strong for its cost, and got rid of it (and then years after that, they moved the ability to red).

Honestly, Counterspell at two mana would destroy the way standard works right now. They found a way to make huge awesome creatures playable, and they really like what that does for the game.

[Machinus]

How many people thought that UU was appropriate because they were just used to that being the cost of counter spell for ten years or so? How many people were basing their decision on tradition rather then game theory?

This gets at the very nature of the validity of such polls in the first place.

No, the polls are still valid. They contain very specific and important information. Players only accept Naturalize because R&D changed the game (even though there was some precedent for this). The same thing is true for blue countermagic, except it is an unprecedented change that comes from a different vision for the future of magic. R&D reprinted and supported counterspell for over a decade, which is a strong and important message about the nature of the game. People care about this and the polls reflect that.

So be removing Cspell, they ostensibly were able to print more strong and NEW counters.

I agree - HOWEVER, this never meant removing Counterspell from Magic permanently. That is a very different decision.

As for Bolt, that was only legal for a couple of years, and a replacement was made four years after the game started. Thirteen years of growth and development is a different matter.

Honestly, Counterspell at two mana would destroy the way standard works right now. They found a way to make huge awesome creatures playable, and they really like what that does for the game.

It's obvious how it would affect modern formats. It's also obvious that they were designed intentionally without Counterspell in mind. I realize the majority of players don't find modern magic boring. I don't want to ruin anyone's magic format.

To me it is significant that R&D has again modified their position on Counterspell. That has impliciations for the future of magic that I care about (and others do as well).

[Machinus]

Your arguments aren't even defendable. There is no objective truth about proper magic costs. It's format dependent, and for the first 90% of magic's lifetime, Counterspell worked just fine. That players responded and accepted the way the game was really DOES matter to modern development and design.

[Jacob Orlove]

There is no objective truth about proper magic costs. It's format dependent

The only reason counterspell was merely very strong for most of its career was that Wizards honestly had no idea what they were doing up until Invasion or so. Tempest and Saga block were full of outrageously broken/undercosted cards. When you can play Survival of the Fittest or Cursed Scroll before your opponent has UU up, Counterspell loses a lot of potency. But Scroll and Survival are hilariously overpowered, and when you remove such cards from the environment, you start to see how strong Counterspell actually is.

[jcb193]

Just make more uncounterable cards.  Players that fundamentally hate counterspells, will love the ability to play a Pro-Blue card/creatures.

[ChemEng]

All this talk dances around the issue. I would argue that Type 2 hasnt gotten anymore exciting since Counterspell. In fact, I would argue the opposite. All I want is for the game to be interesting again. Type 2 used to be exciting. As "broken" as Counterspell decks were, there was always other equally viable options such as Fireblast-Ball Lightning red or Black Ice or Buried Alive or TurboStasis. Powerful cards doing powerful things countered by powerful spells or powerful alternative strategies. Thats just not available right now and hasnt been for some time.

Sure taking Counterspell out of the mix gives the designers more room to explore, but at what cost? Taking the power out of the most active constructed formats? That has to be the wrong answer. I would actually say that its the main reason the skillsets between eternal and other constructed formats are so different today. Have you ever wondered why thats the case? I think its because there arent any good analogues to the deck types between the groups that share the same "feeling" to play anymore. Even while combo decks tend to be present in every format, you cant really compare the "feeling" of playing Heartbeat to that of Pitchlong the same way that Trix with Necro or Jar.dec would. The same is true with the creature decks too. (although Legacy goblins is probably the most similar.)

Im not asking for Memory Jar to be reprinted (even though I got a turn 1 kill with it on the play in a T2 tourney once). Nor Necropotence. Or Yawgmoths Will or Tolarian Academy. All I want are formats that stress skills other than which to swing with and which to stay home in a quasi-swingy way. Thats about the opposite of where the game is now. In most matchups you can tell the winner of the game by whats on the table on turn 2. The chance to come back from behind is minimal at best due to the increased role of tempo in the game. So if the first 2 turns determine the outcome of the game so drastically, why cant they also make more spells that can swing the game from that position also? They can say that Counterspell is bad for the game all they want, but in that environment it would be perfectly balanced.

Do I think WoTC will ever do anything to change it? Nope. But I do believe that they are trying to reduce this game with Time Spiral. Instead of reprinting the powerful cards themselves, they are strapping them onto the most unstable and unreliable mechanic in the game -- a creature or even worse on a spell that doesnt even get played when you play it. Its the reason that Ive sold all my nonEternal playable cards (all $1.7k of them). But if they give me a reason to buy back in, Ill be ready although I dont see that happening in the near future at all.

[Roxas]

wah wah wah I don't like the formats without infinite broken cards to use as crutches because it's not the same as it used to be.

Way to oversimplify the current Standard. I would argue that CHK-RAV (with Coldsnap towards the end) T2 was one of the most skill-intensive and varied formats in the history of the game. If you seriously think that combat was the only (or even the most important) skill in that Standard environment, you are horribly mistaken.

Sure taking Counterspell out of the mix gives the designers more room to explore, but at what cost? Taking the power out of the most active constructed formats? That has to be the wrong answer.

The thing is, they *didn't* "take the power out of the most active constructed formats." Removing Counterspell not only gives R&D more room to design other counters, as others have mentioned, but it also makes deck construction more difficult (and thus skill-intensive). It's a lot harder to go "DARH SIXTEEN COUNTERS AND A LITTLE REMOVAL, MY DECK BEATS THE ENTIRE FORMAT NOW LOLOL" in a format with an unconditional UU Counterspell effective at every stage of the game.

You cant really compare the "feeling" of playing Heartbeat to that of Pitchlong the same way that Trix with Necro or Jar.dec would.

Why not? How are they any different? Just because Heartbeat's combo win is on turn five or six instead of two or three? This is a completely subjective statement that doesn't even really make any sense.

A paragraph on how I have an irrational hatred for the combat phase, feeding into the bad and ideally false stereotypes about Vintage players, and don't even have a clue on how Standard works

First of all, it is completely untrue that you can tell who will win a Standard game by what's in play on turn two. Also, even if that was the case, how is that any worse than in Vintage, where the games sometimes don't even GET to turn two? Why is it okay for you to oversimplify T2 to "I had more/better guys on the table on turn two, I win," but not okay to simplify Vintage to "I drew more restricted cards than you, and you don't have a Force of Will, so I win?" Is this Standard environment less-skill testing and/or "swingy" just because lucky topdecks are more subtle than HAHA ROFL I RIPPED WILL GG?

In particular, the statement:

They can say that Counterspell is bad for the game all they want, but in that environment it would be perfectly balanced.

is one of the most stupid statements I've ever heard.

Instead of reprinting the powerful cards themselves, they are strapping them onto the most unstable and unreliable mechanic in the game -- a creature or even worse on a spell that doesnt even get played when you play it.

I'm fairly sure that Standard is better off without cards like Ancestral Recall, Black Lotus, and Memory Jar as printed. If you want to play with those cards, we already have a very good format called Vintage for that. R&D doesn't need to reprint Counterspell for you to play Vintage. And, as far as the "negative power creep" that you seem to believe is taking place - if it actually was, how do you explain the printing of cards in the past couple blocks that have had significant effects on Vintage (most notably Gifts Ungiven, Dark Confidant, and Jotun Grunt), the mighty format with the power nine, Tinker, and Yawgmoth's Will?

In short, stop whining just because you can't wrap your mind around losing to a six-mana Dragon. It's completely irrational.

[Anusien]

Here's the cheesy answer.  Counterspell keeps other counters from being printed.  T2 would never have had Muddle the Mixture or Remand if Counterspell was still around.  Counterspell isn't strictly better than either of them, but 99% of the time you'd prefer Counterspell.  Keeping Counterspell out of T2 keeps the design space open (with Hinder/Cancel around, it becomes a trade-off).  So who cares?  You do.  Remand is a good T1 card that wouldn't exist without Counterspell.

It's worse than just losing one card (or a few: Rune Snag as well).  Counterspell keeps T2 from stagnating.  If Counterspell were around, there would be like two decks: UB and Structure and Force.  Tron would be gone; mana advantage is worthless if I can answer your turn 3 6-drop with my turn 2 2-drop, and combo would be gone for sure (Heartbeat can play around Mana Leak and Remand, but 8 hard counters is a bit much).

I like the current T2.  I like that it's wide open (imagine Tooth and Nail versus U/x if the blue decks had Counterspell), and that creatures are good again.  I think it's awesome to battle cards like Keiga, Meloku and Wildfire.  Counterspell would take all that away.

[jpmeyer]

Here's the cheesy answer.  Counterspell keeps other counters from being printed.  T2 would never have had Muddle the Mixture or Remand if Counterspell was still around.  Counterspell isn't strictly better than either of them, but 99% of the time you'd prefer Counterspell.  Keeping Counterspell out of T2 keeps the design space open (with Hinder/Cancel around, it becomes a trade-off).  So who cares?  You do.  Remand is a good T1 card that wouldn't exist without Counterspell.

It's worse than just losing one card (or a few: Rune Snag as well).  Counterspell keeps T2 from stagnating.  If Counterspell were around, there would be like two decks: UB and Structure and Force.  Tron would be gone; mana advantage is worthless if I can answer your turn 3 6-drop with my turn 2 2-drop, and combo would be gone for sure (Heartbeat can play around Mana Leak and Remand, but 8 hard counters is a bit much).

I like the current T2.  I like that it's wide open (imagine Tooth and Nail versus U/x if the blue decks had Counterspell), and that creatures are good again.  I think it's awesome to battle cards like Keiga, Meloku and Wildfire.  Counterspell would take all that away.

Similarly, when Counterspell was legal, they would have to make counters that could complement it in some way whlie remaining somewhat similar in power level.  We ended up with Draw-Go decks in Standard for years because of this very reason.  Draw-Go is not good for a format.  There is very little skill involved, since your only choices are "counter that" or "don't counter that" and mirror matches become entirely about luck since the first player to start missing land drops would lose in short order.