So much counter spells hatred
General forum
Posted on July 11, 2014, 7:32 p.m. by VampireArmy
So I've read through countless forums both here and other sites and one theme I keep noticing with the casual crowd is a refusal to play counter spells even when Playing a deck that would benefit from it much more. I'll admit myself i don't touch blue because it's not my style and i will further admit to tilting a little bit from lockdown decks but it's like the whole table top community of mtg is outright allergic to the idea of control. What is your guy's and gals opinion?
VampireArmy says... #3
See i have to disagree with that. I play midrange messing but how fun can it really be paying games over and over where the deciding factor is who has more guys or better guys
July 11, 2014 7:40 p.m.
Well ... I try to ignore / avoid the negativity:
infect
tucking the commander
sol ring
direct damage
attacking other players before they are done ramping in multiplayer
lockdown
sure, why not add counterspells to the list, too!
I just have trouble listening to it anymore ... it's getting silly ... counterspells are a staple of this game and have been since it started.
I think counterspells force people to have decks with depth that can come back from being stopped (ie re-build momentum).
Even better, I think they force players to think carefully about what they choose to do. In particular, it encourages players to try to read each other and anticipate what they have in their hand and could or could not play.
I use countespells a lot.
July 11, 2014 7:41 p.m.
asasinater13 says... #5
there's spot removal to sort that out, or combat tricks. seeing your guy hit the table before he gets killed just tends to be more satisfying than having him die before he even gets to land.
There's also a less win-oriented play style at casual groups, I've played games of commander where my only goal was getting out a Hellkite Charger with Bear Umbra infinite combat step combo, just because it was a cool thing. Whichever side of the table one's sitting on, seeing "wow that's a cool creature/effect/combo" is more satisfying than seeing a control player get an aetherling kill 10 games in a row.
July 11, 2014 7:45 p.m.
Dalektable says... #6
I think they should get over it. Sorry anyone who disagrees, but counterspells are as much a part of the game as creatures or removal spells. If your deck can't handle it or you can't predict it or play around it, thats your fault.
July 11, 2014 7:46 p.m.
VampireArmy says... #7
I have found joy in forcing the counter guy to counter stuff that looks in important but isn't then slamming down the important thing....Oh God the joy of carefull pkay around
July 11, 2014 7:51 p.m.
asasinater13 says... #8
I definitely think they're a part of the game, but they are focussed on stopping opponents from playing their things. Most casual groups just want to play their decks with less focus on winning, playing a race each time is fine because each player is playing out their deck, but one player being stopped from doing what their deck is made to do is much like getting mana screwed, unfun. Making a deck dedicated to stopping someone feels like getting mana screwed each game, really not fun for someone who's new to the game or very casual. occasional counters in a deck are fine but making very controlling decks just lead to less interaction. Interaction is the goal of casual magic players very often.
July 11, 2014 7:53 p.m.
VampireArmy says... #9
I guess that's the thing in the end. Very insightful. I just like my games competitive then haha. Give me a challenge
July 11, 2014 7:55 p.m.
I'm in the pro-counterspells camp. It's a core part of the game, and its no less interactive than getting your big fatty Doom Blade
'd or Supreme Verdict
'd. It's what separates us from the Yugioh players! I just don't want to play a game that's only a creature slug-fest.
July 11, 2014 7:57 p.m.
GoldGhost012 says... #11
I actually hate kill spells and boardwipes more than I hate counterspells.
July 11, 2014 8:07 p.m.
Schuesseled says... #12
Counterspells, like other forms of removal, are reactive. Sure not being able to field your proactive spells suck but try walking in their shoes, they have to know when to react.
If anything field wipes are the real downers, ultimate react all cards. Unless they printed a counter spell that also made them discard their hand.....hold on i feel sick.
July 11, 2014 8:13 p.m.
That's interesting. I find counterspells to be very interactive. They force players to get their heads in the game more and play / respond to their opponent. You have to think not just about the permanents in play, but the cards in hand, glance of the eye, and emotional expression. Counterspells are the pinnacle of the game element of two players facing each other - not just two decks playing out optimally.
I find combos to be the opposite (unless removal / counterspells can be involved). These plays are the furthest possible in the other direction from counterspells on the spectrum of interaction - where not only does who you are up against not matter, neither does their board state nor any other thing at all besides that one select combination of cards in that exact moment of time.
That being said, I do usually let a combo player go off in their glory unchallenged once at a casual kitchen table session... Any other times that they pull the same trick again in the same night must be fought for. It's cool that everyone got to see it - but there is more to the game than that.
July 11, 2014 8:15 p.m.
I must be the least fun person to play magic against. I absolutely love counter spells, spot removal, and board wipes. I guess that's why I play Esper? Haha
July 11, 2014 8:26 p.m.
Casual players hate control because they don't want to play or build a deck that wins. They want a deck that does something cool and control decks can shut that down.
If your playgroup doesn't allow counterspells, you need to find a better group of players because you definitely aren't playing real Magic. Counterspells are an inseparable part of Magic. It would be like banning removal or artifacts.
July 11, 2014 8:29 p.m.
asasinater13 says... #16
the goal of many casual groups tends to be just cool play, a combo is a cool thing whether you're doing it or not, if the goal is fun games instead of win.
while spot removal sucks, a lot of people prefer it to counters, just the general fthought process of "well at least I got to play my guy" is better than "man I can't play anything this game", and in the groups that counter spells are hated it isn't necessarily occasional counters, but control magic as a whole, including things heavy in spot removal or board wipes, all of that (to many casual players) should be used in moderation.
Board wipes don't get as much hate because they're less common in casual groups. They're always a higher rarity, so less pulled, and the groups that dislike that kind of play aren't really ordering any for their decks, so they just don't exist as much in the groups that dislike that style play. Also the groups are less likely to play board wipes they have, because it hits their own creatures too. They're most annoying in dedicated control decks, that just aren't as played in the circles that already hate on any amount of counter spell
July 11, 2014 8:29 p.m.
VampireArmy says... #17
kmcree You don't like a worthy opponent to my degan army
July 11, 2014 8:31 p.m.
VampireArmy says... #19
The only deck my modern aristocrats have lost to was to esper control...
July 11, 2014 8:34 p.m.
It depends on the counter. I have no problem with Dissipate or Swan Song .
By the same token, Render Silent should never be played in a friendly deck. EVER.
July 11, 2014 8:41 p.m.
asasinater13 says... #21
basically, and I don't think friendly decks should play control-based magic unless it's like, pillow fort or turbo fog, because a counter/kill based control just leads to a bored and unhappy opponent
July 11, 2014 8:45 p.m.
See now, if I play casual, then I want to just mess with people and run Nebuchadnezzar or Proteus Staff . My favorite game ever was when I had played (and bluffed) so many counter spells that each turn became run by committee - like in congress - with varios factions lobbying me to let things pass. I was mostly bluffing (after the first few turns anyway) and didn't win ...
Certainly, for competitive games where someone combos out T1-3, you almost need counterspells unless you plan to do the same. But then, you could sideboard a lot of them out for a more casual game if you wanted to.
July 11, 2014 8:46 p.m.
Oh haha yeah I'd take it on. I haven't played modern Esper in days though. I've been playing 8Rack lately.
July 11, 2014 8:47 p.m.
VampireArmy says... #24
It shall be known i once killed six people with a goat token army...
July 11, 2014 9:10 p.m.
asasinater13 says... #26
who needs Cathars' Crusade when Coat of Arms exists?
July 11, 2014 9:13 p.m.
Smellygoat11 says... #28
Actually, when people complain to me about how control is cheap and annoying, I usually have them play one of my control decks. Having them step in your shoes means that they have to think about what to counter, when to wipe, who to burn, etc. They realize that it's not cheap, and they also understand the complexity and planning it takes to make a deck like that work. In turn, they also see ways that I DEAL with the counter playstyle. Baiting a counterspell with a creature or enchantment that looks important so I can get out my win-con is a common solution.
Once you have looked through the eyes of someone who plays control, you realize ways to combat the control playstyle, making you a better player, and adding a whole new dimension to how you interact with your opponent.
July 11, 2014 9:22 p.m.
Ah - that word "cheap"
In some ways, control is "the great equalizer". It is a way for cheaper budget decks to stand up to the cards they could never dream of owning.
July 11, 2014 9:34 p.m.
Dalektable says... #30
There is a reason I don't play casual, I suppose. I'm planning on playing Esper Control next standard and B/r 8rack in modern...lol. I enjoy playing strategies (ie control) that most people don't enjoy playing against. shrugs. I also enjoy an infinite turn combo deck I run in modern online that is super fun to me...not to other people though...It sure is a good thing I only play competitively.
July 11, 2014 9:43 p.m.
KnightsBattlecry001 says... #31
I'm not against or for counterspells. They are just part of the game. When I play a control deck, and something of mine gets countered the most I'll do is go well damn. If everything gets countered, I'll get slightly annoyed. I usually can get a control player to counter something that's not a threat or anything, and when I play my big threat they have nothing to stop it.
Hell I'm more likely to jump the table at someone when I'm hit with a board wipe or playing against turbo fog. When I'm playing casual, my cousin in law loves blowing up my field with a Supreme Verdict and seeing my reaction. He usually goes hey guess what as he slowly stands up and throws it down. Throughout the house you can hear God damn it! and laughing as I jump up and chase him down. Never caught him yet.
Our casual games have become folklore at the LGS we go to. Everyone just laughs. Good times.
July 11, 2014 9:58 p.m.
VampireArmy says... #34
No better ally than the person who hates the thing as much as you do xD
July 11, 2014 10:49 p.m.
asasinater13 says... #36
ehh disliking counters doesn't mean bad, it's just a different focus of playing. in competetive the goal is to win, in the casual/friendly games where people don't like counters they want to show what they're decks can do and have fun interactions on the board, one person constantly saying no isn't fun interactions or showing what a deck can do.
July 11, 2014 11:34 p.m.
VampireArmy says... #37
"Bad" isn't quite the word but I have heard brutal stories about MTGO where people get pretty raged at the control guys unless they stick to tournament practice >.>
July 11, 2014 11:34 p.m.
VampireArmy says... #38
Also I want to put in that if you can't play around a control person then you have failed yourself as an mtg player casual or not...
July 11, 2014 11:36 p.m.
asasinater13 says... #39
Definitely needs to be something that can be played around, I'm not trying to say control is bad, just that it's a more competitive style than many people enjoy
July 11, 2014 11:38 p.m.
SwiftDeath says... #40
one of my favorite plays to around a counterspell is I have Fleetfoot Panther in hand and Eternal Witness in play. I play Phyrexian Altar because I know I can combo and win that turn. My opponent counters my altar. so after he is tapped out I play Aluren to allow me to play the panther to bounce the witness, replay the witness, return the altar, recast the altar, and still have just enough mana to combo off.
July 11, 2014 11:45 p.m.
My opinion is if they hate something they should learn ways to fight against it or stop playing. Whining and saying it's cheap is honestly just poor sportsmanship and it's that attitude that is truly what is unhealthy in Magic.
July 12, 2014 12:16 a.m.
angrychains says... #42
Ive noticed that as my meta evolved the more we incorporated control into our decks. Just consider most casual groups as "primitive". Come back after 6 months and if they still exist, see how many of them are playing counterspells
July 12, 2014 12:53 a.m.
asasinater13 says... #43
I know plenty of good players who just don't enjoy playing decks with counter spells in them, saying someone someone who doesn't like playing against/with them is "primitive" isn't quite accurate. It definitely has to do with the reasons for playing, people who are win-focused are fine with counterspells, people who are playing in a friendly/casual group trying to show cool things their deck can do generally dislike counterspells. Considering competitive play the end-all for all players is just not accurate. some people like to make flavorful decks to follow a theme, some enjoy playing out a giant creature, some like playing a really cool combo, however fragile or difficult to assemble. all of those goals are made much more difficult by counterspells, and the only real way to play around them is to be able to bait them early, wait for people to tap out, or play your own counterspells and leave mana open for them. None of the above goals of flavor, noncompetitive combos, or "look at this cool thing I pulled" are really fans of thinning out their cool things to show off with counters, and many won't have the right colors in their deck to do that. people in competitive magic definitely need to accept counters as part of the game, but in casual groups without competitive intentions there isn't really a reason to play them.
July 12, 2014 1:40 a.m.
FalkensteinAZ says... #44
"In competetive the goal is to win, in the casual/friendly games where people don't like counters they want to show what they're decks can do."
The goal of magic is always to win. The game does not function without it. The problem is the difference between 'casual' and 'competitive' players. The casual group is primitive, in that they are always goldfishing. They want to show what their deck can do, but it can't actually do those things outside of a vacuum. So they expect their opponents to sit there and watch the show. The goal is just to beat the fish.
The 'competitive' player has realized and accepted that the game of Magic is always about interaction and a struggle to best one's opponent. It doesn't matter if they like to play at PTQ's or the kitchen table, these players have a hard time just letting an opponent advance their game, so they catch flak from the 'casual' crowd.
The counterspells are hated on, because of all the ways to hinder an opponent, they're the most direct in sending the message that you don't always get to do exactly as you please. Want to solve the problem? Run Thoughtseize with your counterspells, you'll never have to play that person again.
July 12, 2014 2:18 a.m.
angrychains says... #45
primitive may have been the wrong word here... I think a middle ground can be found in assasinater13 and falkensteinaz's arguments. from assasin's argument: my group is definitely casual (we only play mp edh) and yet we still pack ~5+ counterspells when we can, why? because when an opposing deck assembles that amazing wincon and managed to do it after fighting hate from 3 other players then it really is cool--they really deserved that win and (in general) the rest of the table is satisfied with how the match ended. and from AZ's argument: i think we forget that sometimes the goal isnt to -just- win, but to have a little fun in doing so--
i think in general playgroups would have an easier time in accepting counters and answers in general if they just learned to enjoy putting their deck through the grinder--im sure people would be a lot more satisfied with their wins when they know that they really deserved them.
July 12, 2014 2:53 a.m.
Schuesseled says... #46
Please how ignorant, casual magic isn't about playing in a vacuum, it's about playing in an amphitheatre.
Competitive magic is 1vs1 orientated, and competitive 1vs1 decks are different to "casual" let's play anyway with any number of people decks.
The reason you see less control and more midrange, is because control doesn't work as well when you are trolling 6 people.
In order to play a control build in a multiway your win con usually has to be an infinite combo, and that is a good way to to quickly find yourself killed first every match.
July 12, 2014 6:13 a.m.
Gidgetimer says... #47
I don't mind counter spells, kill spells, or board wipes in kitchen table magic. What does annoy me are control decks that have no way to win within 5 turns of establishing control. If you are going to play control I feel that you should at least include a win condition.
As for why play Cathars' Crusade when Coat of Arms exists. Because one is single sided and gives a permanent boost which is easily abused and the other gives symmetrical buffs that count creatures on the battle field and can't be used as a win condition only a win more condition.
July 12, 2014 8:57 a.m.
I have had more than my fair share of opponents flat out tell me, enough with the counterspells... I used to use them predominately, to the point my opponents would just play a land, end the turn for fear of the counterspell... I now pretty much avoid them, as I enjoy more fun, interaction, and longer games.... That and since I exclusively build decks from scratch (if they work or not,. oh well i had fun), I like being able to show all the possible things the deck can do, sometimes ignoring life totals, and just playing to "last card".
July 12, 2014 9:38 a.m.
The assumption that counters are for winning only and are never for the fun of the game seems like an oversimplification.
Some players (like me) find the psychological poker-style playing of people and not just cards to be the fun part of the game.
Some counterspells are more for fun. They splice in other effects like mill or direct damage. They might be combos in and of themselves like Rewind . They might allow you to take control of the spell that was just played. Others are tribal - counterspells are woven into the faerie tribe on many level. Others are thematic, being part of an ETB effect like Mystic Snake .
On the other hand, some counterspells do seem a bit more competitive - like running Spell Snare after analyzing the meta and seeing - wow, so many 2CMC spells! But in general, it's not the case that counterspells are only for winning and not for fun.
I usually play multiplayer EDH and before I took a break, we played what would have been called at that time multiplayer casual. We have always had counters and control. My brother who I play against most often, is known to have as many as 16 removal spells in a single EDH deck. The control stuff isn't only good for people hellbent on winning, they also play in the favor of people playing on a budget because:
Opponent: 8 money cards, no control
You: 3 money cards, 6 control
It can become a game then of which money card gets left standing. Timing and luck become more of a factor, too. It can become a game of who gets their answers and when - which doesn't care who paid the most for their deck. And it keeps the hope alive that the game is worth playing out, even if someone gets their combo pieces or goodstuff cards. You still have a chance if you have the right control somewhere in the deck.
asasinater13 says... #2
I dislike having too much control in casual play, it's just less interactive gameplay, and casual players mostly just want fun interactions. saying "no" isn't as fun as getting things going for yourself, for either player. I have the same general opinion about board wipes in casual, they're just less fun.
July 11, 2014 7:38 p.m.