Welcome to Draw 3 Cards

Question

1

Once, life was simple. UU would mean "counter target spell", pure and simple. Do you think Wizards should bring Counterspell?

alt text

edited Feb 7 at 11:00

Silly Freak♦
725●1●8

asked Oct 16 at 15:24

ripper234♦♦
2,799●4●12

Yaron · Answer 1 · 2009-10-17 23:15:21Z UTC

2

i think UU is too low a cost. "Cancel" UU1 is much more appropiate.

answered Oct 17 at 23:15

Yaron♦
302●2

I enjoyed the mono-blue control deck type, which I'm not sure is viable without this old staple (though I admit I don't follow constructed decks). If they brought back Lightning Bolt, it's possible Counterspell will make a comeback some day. – ripper234 Oct 18 at 18:27

coldfirero · Answer 2 · 2009-10-19 22:39:22Z UTC

2

As PV once said after Zendikar set was spoiled:

"Ok Wizards ... we got it ... we won't get Counterspell back, but PLEASE stop reprinting Cancel!"

I feel the same. While UU for Counterspell might be a little too low (not that i wouldn't enjoy it) the format needs some kind of efficient 2 mana counterspell (as in Mana Leak / Rune Snag / etc.).

answered Oct 19 at 22:39

coldfirero
160●3

	Ah, mana leak was sweet. How about UU, lose 2 or 3 life: counter target spell? – ripper234 Oct 19 at 22:50
	Hmm, paying life to counter a spell seems nice (and the UU keeps you committed to blue). Good idea. Also, Spell Pierce is very similar to Mana Leak but still considered pretty useless -- why? I also liked the old Spell Blast which meant you had to out-land your opponent to effectively counter. – Avish Oct 21 at 12:11
	You can't compare Spell Pierce with Mana Leak. Mana Leak says 3 mana instead on 2 and it can counter Creatures too! – coldfirero Oct 21 at 21:01
	Spell Pierce is kind of useless since it's no global counterspell. Wizards just won't make another hardcounter without drawbacks or higher mana than 1UU. – Ancarma♦ Oct 24 at 15:20
	Yes cancel is boring, and though it always sees marginal play in limited nobody wants too see it there... more interesting counterspells must be made!! – rif-raf♦ Oct 31 at 23:10

Ancarma · Answer 3 · 2009-10-24 15:18:55Z UTC

Cancel is great the way it is. 3 Mana for hardcounter is excellent, even though i would've liked to see it turn 2U instead of 1UU. The current mana cost makes it too hard to cast in 3 colour mode, since we don't have any Vivid lands anymore (back then, Cryptic Command was easy).

Counterspell would be too overpowered in the current format, since most people play two-colour decks.

And i disagree with Julain, Magic isn't getting more and more creature based. They merely moving control to different colours like black and white, instead of the everpresent blue counterdeck control.

wildmonkey · Answer 4 · 2010-01-20 10:10:17Z UTC

counterspell wouldnt be back, because if it does, cards like cruel ultimatum, any spell with casting cost 7 and above would be unplayable....it a good thing that counterspell not reprited, we get to experience casting big spells and effect...

ripper234 · Answer 5 · 2010-02-05 15:50:24Z UTC

1

See Hitler's opinion.

answered Feb 5 at 15:50

ripper234♦♦
2,799●4●12

That's hilarious! – CodeSavvyGeek Feb 18 at 3:30

Julain · Answer 6 · 2009-10-24 15:06:26Z UTC

its not the cost of counterspell that is the problem, its the other counterspells in the same format. If the only counterspell in a block where CS then it would be fine, if the format also had manaleak and another decent cheap counter then were back where we dont wanna be, with controll decks countering every single spell. The problem is that wotc is dumbing down magic and going for a more creatur oriented aproach these days. they make overpowered creatures and neuter controll and combo. The current std format could actually benefit from counterspell as cancel is to slow and theres currently no viable controll strategy.

Should Wizards bring back Counterspell?

Remember to vote up questions/answers you find interesting or helpful (requires 15 reputation points)

6 Answers