General Fight Club
- Thread starter Jason Waddell
- Start date
Grillo_Parlante
Contributor
Well said, and maybe I've been unfair to raptor.
I feel that this applies to delver as well: if you run it as a blue aggro card its not great, but if you run it as a low investment blue tempo card that lets you use a turn very efficently, its quite reasonable. Of course, they are both demanding cards, almost build arounds, but the incentive is there and its kind of nice to see that relationship with one drops.
Onderzeeboot
Ecstatic Orb
Wow, that's a pretty aggressive and strict way of interpreting my words, but okay. It's fine if you don't like the ability, but I have a hard time believing anyone would be really upset they couldn't counter a spell with "can't be countered". Are your red players complaining when their removal spells don't stick because someone plays one of the cards you listed above? If no, why would the blue player complain they can't counter Firecraft?
Aoret
Developer
I don't have much to add to the raptor discussion, but I'll go ahead and represent Team No-Uncounterable just for the sake of argument (although a few of these posts are pushing the unfriendliness line IMO)
I don't like running uncounterable stuff because I've intentionally pushed hard to make control worse and aggro better. If I've done a good job of that (and I have... I'm having a hell of a time winning with control and nobody else drafts it), then I don't want to include cards which strictly hate on a strategy I'm already suppressing. A different way to look at it is that uncounterable cards decrease interaction. If I tout interaction and decision density as the things that make games fun, I am by definition decreasing fun by including these cards.
All of that said, I completely get where Eric is coming from in saying that, more often than not, the uncounterable clause doesn't matter. If there's no other option for a certain effect than for me to run an uncounterable card, and I really need that effect, okay, fine. The Abrupt Decay example doesn't really work well for me because I can just run Maelstrom Pulse, a card which I've heard a number of you mention as having its own "unfair gotcha" mechanic. I think that one basically boils down to taste, as one effect or the other may be unpalatable for a given playgroup or personal history. Alara-Zendikar Jund was my first standard deck and I used to love using pulse to sweep tokens or duplicate creatures, so the effect has a feel-good aspect for me even when I'm on the receiving end of it.
I don't like running uncounterable stuff because I've intentionally pushed hard to make control worse and aggro better. If I've done a good job of that (and I have... I'm having a hell of a time winning with control and nobody else drafts it), then I don't want to include cards which strictly hate on a strategy I'm already suppressing. A different way to look at it is that uncounterable cards decrease interaction. If I tout interaction and decision density as the things that make games fun, I am by definition decreasing fun by including these cards.
All of that said, I completely get where Eric is coming from in saying that, more often than not, the uncounterable clause doesn't matter. If there's no other option for a certain effect than for me to run an uncounterable card, and I really need that effect, okay, fine. The Abrupt Decay example doesn't really work well for me because I can just run Maelstrom Pulse, a card which I've heard a number of you mention as having its own "unfair gotcha" mechanic. I think that one basically boils down to taste, as one effect or the other may be unpalatable for a given playgroup or personal history. Alara-Zendikar Jund was my first standard deck and I used to love using pulse to sweep tokens or duplicate creatures, so the effect has a feel-good aspect for me even when I'm on the receiving end of it.
I agree with Skrap, let's tone down the rhetoric. We can disagree on cards without making the issue personal.
For what it's worth, I find that things like Spell Pierce, Negate, and other such anti-spell cards hose control a lot more than Loxodon Smiter or Abrupt Decay. It's not the end of the world if I can't Condescend my opponent's 4/4, because chances are that I have a Day of Judgment or Crux of Fate waiting in the wings, anyways. On the other hand, if my board sweeper gets nuked by a one mana counterspell, I'm not going to be a happy camper. Even having my spells Remanded for a turn can mean the difference between stabilizing the board and getting brought down to a dangerously low life total. When it comes to supporting control and counterspells, I find it ironic that blue has been its own worst enemy, and that removing some of the dedicated hate has done more to buff the archetype than worrying about uncounterable clauses sprinkled around here and there on otherwise tame cards.
For what it's worth, I find that things like Spell Pierce, Negate, and other such anti-spell cards hose control a lot more than Loxodon Smiter or Abrupt Decay. It's not the end of the world if I can't Condescend my opponent's 4/4, because chances are that I have a Day of Judgment or Crux of Fate waiting in the wings, anyways. On the other hand, if my board sweeper gets nuked by a one mana counterspell, I'm not going to be a happy camper. Even having my spells Remanded for a turn can mean the difference between stabilizing the board and getting brought down to a dangerously low life total. When it comes to supporting control and counterspells, I find it ironic that blue has been its own worst enemy, and that removing some of the dedicated hate has done more to buff the archetype than worrying about uncounterable clauses sprinkled around here and there on otherwise tame cards.
I was wondering if anyone else did that; passed on the anti-spell-only counters. It really lets control breathe a lot more, I think. Cube is creature-centric enough without random, powerful snags like Spell Pierce dragging down spells/control decks.
Yeah, I've run Spell Pierce, Negate, Glen Elendra Archmage, and other variants from time to time, and eventually found all of them wholly unnecessary. With the way most Riptide cubes are structured, control needs all the help it can get, and hating on their spell parade while you make unkillable 2/1's for one isn't really a good time for anyone. To that end, I've also brought up the ratio of instants to sorceries, to ensure that reactive control decks can, well, react at any time they need to.
Ahh, Archmage! I have a soft spot for faeries, but now that you mention it, she actually.. Has never done much aside from counter some rogue spell every million games? I think it may be time to bump her out. Looks like I may have room for Thopter Spy Network after all!
Doom Blade interacts with Gods Willing which interacts with Pyroclasm which interacts with Giant Growth which interacts with Lightning Bolt which interacts with Ajani's Presence which interacts with Crux of Fate which interacts with Regenerate which interacts... etc, etc, etc. But Day of Judgment doesn't interact with Cloudshift, and Ajani's Presence doesn't interact with Tragic Slip, and Undying Evil doesn't interact with Faith's Fetters.
Condescend interacts with everything. Is that inherently "fair"? No, but it's how MTG works, and it's why constructed MTG is how it is. It's something that's hard to balance in Cubes, too (though usually the problem isn't from counters themselves, but supplemental removal/wraths... but that's a much deeper/different topic).
Let's say a control player with Dissolve has stabilized at 1 life, against a red aggro player (with Firecraft, obv) with no meaningful board left. I don't think having an "out" in the form of uncounterable burn makes games more fun -- I want interactive decisions, not dramatic topdecks.
It's sort of like why I wouldn't consider playing Rivals' Duel in a non-Tribal cube. If 99% of the time, the Creature type on your cards doesn't matter,why add a card which adds an asterisk to that and brings up 1% scenarios due to nothing more than random circumstance?
Condescend interacts with everything. Is that inherently "fair"? No, but it's how MTG works, and it's why constructed MTG is how it is. It's something that's hard to balance in Cubes, too (though usually the problem isn't from counters themselves, but supplemental removal/wraths... but that's a much deeper/different topic).
Let's say a control player with Dissolve has stabilized at 1 life, against a red aggro player (with Firecraft, obv) with no meaningful board left. I don't think having an "out" in the form of uncounterable burn makes games more fun -- I want interactive decisions, not dramatic topdecks.
It's sort of like why I wouldn't consider playing Rivals' Duel in a non-Tribal cube. If 99% of the time, the Creature type on your cards doesn't matter,why add a card which adds an asterisk to that and brings up 1% scenarios due to nothing more than random circumstance?
FlowerSunRain
Contributor
Barbarian Ring has been killing people in my cube for years and I can't ever remember getting a complaint about it.
Glen Elendra Archmage hosed control decks something fierce over here - a double Negate on a stick is no small potatoes if you can stick her, and her extremely cheap activation means there's rarely ever a 'shields down' moment beyond that initial turn. Once I realized how badly she was kicking control decks while they were down - and worse yet, instilling control-on-control-deck violence - I had to give her the ol' heave-ho.
Aoret
Developer
Yes. Because everything else in the game is allowed to deal with problematic permanents at any point in time after they resolve. Counterspells trade the ability to interact at any point in time for the ability to interact with any non-land permanent (or non-permanent!).
It's a difficult balancing act. When I hear control needs all the help it can get, it reminds me how different my meta is. You'd think with control resorting to Kokusho as a finisher, control would totally suck in my cube but it doesn't. And maybe because guys don't actively draft the all in TurnMyShitSideways.dec.
Glen Elendra is good, but I have yet to see it wreck a control player. It hits like a limp noodle and costs 4 to get in play. It's certainly good in the blue tempo deck that bounces, builds a board state and stalls with counters. She's super great in that deck, but it's also not a deck that is doing 20 points of damage on T4. So I feel like decks have plenty of chances to get back in the game.
On thing that is probably different for me though is the fact that control often has to rely heavily on creatures. I have no walkers and you really can't build draw go here (can any cube actually do that)? So against Glen Elendra, control just needs to stick a fat flying thing and that threat is pretty much neutralized (at least from a damage dealing perspective).
I ran Spell Pierce for a short time, but it's really narrow. And without walkers, it's annoyingly narrow. I didn't cut it because it hurt control too much, I cut it because it was useless more times than it did anything.
Glen Elendra is good, but I have yet to see it wreck a control player. It hits like a limp noodle and costs 4 to get in play. It's certainly good in the blue tempo deck that bounces, builds a board state and stalls with counters. She's super great in that deck, but it's also not a deck that is doing 20 points of damage on T4. So I feel like decks have plenty of chances to get back in the game.
On thing that is probably different for me though is the fact that control often has to rely heavily on creatures. I have no walkers and you really can't build draw go here (can any cube actually do that)? So against Glen Elendra, control just needs to stick a fat flying thing and that threat is pretty much neutralized (at least from a damage dealing perspective).
I ran Spell Pierce for a short time, but it's really narrow. And without walkers, it's annoyingly narrow. I didn't cut it because it hurt control too much, I cut it because it was useless more times than it did anything.
Nice one.
Onderzeeboot
Ecstatic Orb
control-on-control violence is the best most beautiful kind of magic imo, everything matters, everyone misplays crucially a couple times, and sequencing is so so so important!
GEA is a good card but I also cut her because I was shifting away from pod's dominance as my cool midrange deck (now I'm at two and two cocos)
also I haven't played with Firecraft yet but I'm really excited for it, I run like twice the counterspell density most of you do (5%!) and uncounterability has been serious gravy on spells like Abrupt Decay, Krosan Grip and Sudden Shock. It's the insurance you want most on your big burn spell, imo.
(run more counterspells you dinks)
they were super wrong to begin with (a 5% 'whiff' bound of 'only hitting one creature' is unreasonably restrictive) and my cube has a lower curve and more good creatures. Even if it's just card selection, a one mana premium for flash seems okay in green - and that's one of the worse cases. Whiffing entirely is rare and everyone laughs, good times are had. Hitting a creature that can recur it is incredible. I don't know that every RipLab cube needs two but given my format's curve I've been pleased with the second copy.
I'll second safra's post - double CoCo is really awesome and super fun, and at the worst it's either a laugh or it's one more mana to flash in a good 3-drop. It's easily one of the coolest ideas I've stolen from safra's cube 
Wats coco
Grillo_Parlante
Contributor
Coco is the best black 6 drop
Or maybe not
Grillo's joking, obviously
Coco is one of the anchors of the enchantress theme and one of the most busted heroic enablers out there.
I know most of us try to keep our power levels in check, but trust me, it's worth cutting loose for this sweet play. First of all, green enchanment - Argothian Enchantress interaction, anyone? Second - it's a 1-drop, so that's easily a lot of tempo to play as a tempo enabler. Thirdly, it's a sick piece of anti-value tech, sliding right into W/G heroic aggro-enchantress combo and blowing midrange goodstuff out of the water. It's basically the inspiration for the Ordeal cycle in Theros, except it isn't complete garbage. a +1/+1 flier in 4 turns? For 1 mana? If that's not the most value tempo play you've ever seen, I don't know what to tell ya! Combo with Starfield of Nyx and you've got a new +1/+1 flier in another 4 turns (5 for starfield trigger I guess, I'm not sure, it's a sick combo and hard to tempo your head around it).
Coco is one of the anchors of the enchantress theme and one of the most busted heroic enablers out there.
I know most of us try to keep our power levels in check, but trust me, it's worth cutting loose for this sweet play. First of all, green enchanment - Argothian Enchantress interaction, anyone? Second - it's a 1-drop, so that's easily a lot of tempo to play as a tempo enabler. Thirdly, it's a sick piece of anti-value tech, sliding right into W/G heroic aggro-enchantress combo and blowing midrange goodstuff out of the water. It's basically the inspiration for the Ordeal cycle in Theros, except it isn't complete garbage. a +1/+1 flier in 4 turns? For 1 mana? If that's not the most value tempo play you've ever seen, I don't know what to tell ya! Combo with Starfield of Nyx and you've got a new +1/+1 flier in another 4 turns (5 for starfield trigger I guess, I'm not sure, it's a sick combo and hard to tempo your head around it).
Grillo_Parlante
Contributor
You know thats a strong card because it has so much text on it and that I don't even want to read it. Just scoop.
I can't speak for the whole site, but I don't really mind uncounterable. All cards have their strengths and weaknesses, it's just a question of whether these strengths and weaknesses are interesting.
FWIW the "uncounterability" clause is irrelevant most of the time, and usually doesn't win the game outright (counterspells can target other spells on other turns), whereas protection can blank your opponent's board and removal in a really uninteresting way.