General Fight Club


vs ?

Thermo-Alchemist might be a good middle ground. It's also restricted to instants and sorceries, but has the upside of getting in consistent damage which might make it better for aggro decks. For more combo oriented decks, it blocks more effectively and comes down sooner. Heck, the consistent damage might be better here too.

I'm not sure though; We haven't gotten to see Thermo-Alchemist in action since we made the swap. As far as we figured, Guttersnipe was a little too clunky for our normal decks, but didn't fit perfectly into our combo oriented decks either. We expect Thermo-Alchemist to be a better fit in both, with the caveat that my list is higher powered.

In the aggro decks, Guttersnipe was a slow inefficient body that didn't consistently get to attack. It felt bad as a 3 mana investment that only did 2-4 damage and could restrict your sequencing. Thermo-Alchemist feels better here as a "set it and forget it" that fits into the curve better and doesn't feel as bad if you have to run out your spells before playing it.

The non combo "spells" decks tended to take the form of control decks. As control decks, they weren't really looking for value in the form of shocks to the face. The damage never really mattered and it felt like being down a card--especially since the body wouldn't matter or it would eat removal more inconveniently than a finisher would. As a blocker, Thermo-Alchemist feels like it could play similarly to Thing in the Ice which has been perfect for us. It's a balanced form of early game interaction; it's cheap enough that it doesn't feel inefficient to lose; and it's a looming threat that both players can see coming and play around.

For combo decks, Guttersnipe played similarly to as it would in a control deck. It got there more often, but still felt mispositioned. It was too vulnerable and a worse win condition than a spell you could play after. The need for Guttersnipe as a win condition also faded as we've gotten more reliable support since its time. (The best being Mizzix's Mastery for being a lot easier and more forgiving to set up and Jace, Telepath Unbound's -3 for being the best way to double your storm finisher.) So while the switch to Thermo-Alchemist might be worse in direct comparison, we don't expect to miss it too much.

All that was conjecture and environment specific. If your "spells" deck involves more Stormchaser Mage and Bloodwater Entity chip-shots, I can see the Guttersnipe damage adding up better. But at the point of having that much archetype focus, why not also double or triple up with Firebrand Archer and Thermo-Alchemist? They're both viable in non-blue red decks. If you can only fit one, I'd say Thermo-Alchemist is the most flexible and all around desirable.

~~~~~

I prefer Miscalculation over the rest. I'm more in the market for a counterspell first and I have 1 mana cantrips, so the extra tax is more valuable to me than the cheaper cycling.

I also prefer and do run Mana Tithe over Force Spike. Mana Tithe usually feels more like a defensive protection effect in a low curve white deck, whereas Force Spike in blue decks is more often a cheap catchall answer (and that feels way lamer). I find that Daze is a better Mana Tithe equivalent for blue in that it's less effective as a catchall and fits better in lower curve decks.
 
I would rank the three counterspells that way

Miscalculation > Force Spike >>>> Censor

Miscalculation is a Perfect counterspell, super good but not problematic for lower power levels.
Spike is a fun and strong card, I could understand if someone doesn't want the blowout moments though. I love them.
Censors two mediocre modes don't convince me. I'd play Opt over it.
 
Censor is excellent, I strongly disagree the sentiment of two mediocre modes, that's just vastly underrating the ability to cycle for a single {U}. That is excellent utility in the late game leaving you with enough mana to play whatever action you might draw into off that cycle. It could be digging for an answer at your opponent's EOT after a big turn or looking for a threat during your main phase, being able to dig a card deeper in the crucial parts of the game is incredibly clutch.

Force Spike, on the other hand, has a very limited window where it's amazing. Most of the time you have to be on the play, have it early in the game, and/or your opponent has to be oblivious to its presence in your deck. It is terrible if you have it stranded in your hand late in the game. It has always been way too feast or famine for me personally, I'm just not a fan of that for reactive cards when you need a definite answer. That one mana tax is almost negligible in the late game unless you snag their play for the turn, but better players will play around it if they've seen it. You don't have the cycling upside of Censor to find a better spell and effectively shave down your deck size by a card. Censor has been great for me, Force Spike was hot garbage for a long time.

Miscalculation is definitely my favorite of the trio, have had it since my cube's inception and will never cut it. Checks off everything I'd want from a counterspell while having the utility of turning into another card if a tax effect isn't what you need.
 
I also think cycle for U is excellent value on Censor (or any card for that matter). I have not played with Censor but my personal feeling is that force spike is better in tigher/faster cubes. Basically, if typical turns are often really efficient where mana isn't wasted, then the force spike effect is going to be effective nearly as often as miscalculation but at a better cycle cost. The looser your cube decks are though, the worse this is and the more time Censor will spend being a cantrip. So I can see Censor being slightly better or much worse than Miscalculation depending.
 
Cycling seems like a weird thing to want on a counterspell.


I think it's ideal actually. Sometimes your opponent casts something and you don't care to counter it. Or maybe they have nothing to play and you don't want to waste mana. Holding a counter and not playing it is a big tempo hit, so having something to use that mana you held is IMO very important. Cards that do both are self contained.
 
I guess what I’m saying is more like...opportunity cost?

Like of course adding cycling to any card, all things equal, will make it strictly a better card.

But I guess I’m talking more in the consideration of comparing Miscalculation to, say Mana Leak.

Seems like you trade off the power of the counter to get cycling and I feel like I would rather just have the more powerful counter.
 
I guess what I’m saying is more like...opportunity cost?

Like of course adding cycling to any card, all things equal, will make it strictly a better card.

But I guess I’m talking more in the consideration of comparing Miscalculation to, say Mana Leak.

Seems like you trade off the power of the counter to get cycling and I feel like I would rather just have the more powerful counter.

That line of thinking can trend towards a powermaxing of the blue section that is one-dimensional and oriented towards Draw-Go Control. If all of your counters skew towards "most powerful answer", your only way of balancing the Draw-Go Control deck is to mess with counterspell density, which is a way to promote a hypothetical scarcity of an effect that could instead be balanced by including a range of counters that appeal to different decks and perform different roles, but which can all still be assembled into a (significantly less miserable to face) Draw-Go Control deck all the same.

To put it another way, I'm very happy to slot Censor or perhaps even Miscalculation into my {U}{G} Super-Ramp Deck or my {W}{R} Artifact Aggro deck splashing {U}; those decks are interested in a counterspell from time to time, but can't always be in a position to leave up mana for one, and so they will tend to go very light on such effects (with most decks that merely splash {U} passing on them entirely, barring a strong flash component). In either of these examples, where I wouldn't be as willing to add Mana Leak, Censor and Miscalculation can do some heavy lifting on the back of their versatility that Mana Leak just can't provide.
 
I feel like flexible cards are generally better in cube. And there's probably a lot of reasons for it. Power level is high, so having an answer now versus later is just so important (even if that answer is slightly inefficient or weaker). Archetypes are also looser. Singleton is a big reason for this, but also just being a draft format. Decks don't usually do one thing super well. They do many things and so having flexible cards to react to that as the game evolves is just really valuable.

Again, Censor is pretty narrow as a counter if people aren't tapping out a lot. And if it's cycling 90%+, you are probably better served with miscalculation or something else entirely. But that's just my opinion.
 
I have to admit, I'm probably too harsh on Censor, considering my love for Force Spike. I mean, it has some advantages, like you can counter a mana elf or a strong 2-drop, depending on being on the draw or the play. And leaving up only a single mana is so much less hurtful in the early turn. I play my 3-drop on turn 4, then counter your 4- or 5-drop. That's value. And I still think Force Spike is the slightly better card.

But considering how happy I've been to cycle Miscalc before, I'm probably unfair to Censor. It's just that I feel it will be cycled more often than cast. I simply don't like the card.

But objectively, Censor is probably quite cubeable too.
 
How do people feel about Daze compared to Force Spike/Censor? Not so much Miscalc, I feel like that comparison is more to Mana Leak effects.
 
How do people feel about Daze compared to Force Spike/Censor? Not so much Miscalc, I feel like that comparison is more to Mana Leak effects.

I don't like anything that is completely without counterplay like that for my own format, but I do really, really like drafting Daze. I wouldn't put it in my list because I love my drafters too much but it's a really swell card.
 
I wouldn't put it in my list because I love my drafters too much but it's a really swell card.
#Mood

Probably the reason I won't re-include a "fair" Force of Will. I just like using the mana system, you know?

Probably going ahead with a test run of Censor. I like the thought of it pulling double duty as toned-down blue Cantrip. I have precedent for this with Curator of Mysteries, and Censor synergizes with the Curator too!
 
#Mood

Probably the reason I won't re-include a "fair" Force of Will. I just like using the mana system, you know?

Probably going ahead with a test run of Censor. I like the thought of it pulling double duty as toned-down blue Cantrip. I have precedent for this with Curator of Mysteries, and Censor synergizes with the Curator too!
I agree. I ran Daze and Gush and Stoke the Flames and a bunch of other free stuff for a while, and it just led to feel bad games where people went for stuff when the shields were supposed to be down and got blown out, or were too scared of getting blown out to do anything. Everything is required by law to use the mana system now.
 

Grillo_Parlante

Contributor
I agree. I ran Daze and Gush and Stoke the Flames and a bunch of other free stuff for a while, and it just led to feel bad games where people went for stuff when the shields were supposed to be down and got blown out, or were too scared of getting blown out to do anything. Everything is required by law to use the mana system now.


My experiences as well, though I still run stoke, which might be a mistake.

Burn just gets very clunky in terms of CC and not being boring.
 
I handle it like this as well, I don't like free spells in my meta.

My only exception is Devouring Light, but I could see me replacing that if it feels wrong at one point. But I can't remember seeing it cast for free while the player was tapped out.
 
Drover is way too mana intensive while Mentor usually works in a mid-powered cube. Easy for me.

If your cube is lower in power, Exemplars might be too good, although I personally love to play it. The Archangel is somewhat uninteresting, 3 toughness makes it easy to remove.
 

Onderzeeboot

Ecstatic Orb
Seriously? The Exemplars might be too good? Archangel straight up murders people, I've never seen Exemplars do that all the time it's been in my cube. Yes Archangel's easy too remove, but unlike Exemplars it's a removal check. If they don't have it, it acts as a one sided Abyss until they run out of flyers, at which point it kills the opponent in a few hits, and all the while you don't even have to let down your defenses, since you're attacking with only one creature each turn. Exemplars is the more interesting card as well, I think I have seen all three modes be relevant by now, and it's good in different archetypes as well. Exemplars definitely gets my vote!

Driver and Mentor, however, I completely agree with Monschwein on ;)
 
Top