My wager: the conspiracy cards will be formatted like the flip cards from Kamigawa, with different messages to send to drafters based on which orientation you pass it in. (For example, something like "I am drafting aggro/control" or "Keep/pass blue.") This will probably imply a different, symmetric back.
My reading is that when a spell is played, Quirion Dryad does one check: is this spell (something not green)? If this is true in any respect, be it blue, black or both, the "or" statement is true, and the check returns a +1/+1 counter.
Many thanks to those so dexterous with the "Orb," first of all. As for these cards, I want play sets. The power level is just right, the costs are playable, and they seem so generally useful.
This set looks fantastic for limited; the picture may be incomplete, but the level of board interactivity in games looks impressive. Whether or not plane shifting/these power levels are a cash-grab on the part of Wizards is, in my opinion, a moot point given how interesting and fun these cards look like they will be. Also, if these (very impressive, interesting) cards are uncommons, I want to see what the red or blue non-cycle rares will be like.
Merike hardly seems the "advisor" type, though I admit she spends her time telling people what to do. Seeing as she isn;t green and has an ability stereotypically tied to blue, I think Wizard is is likely, though she will definitely be a dual type creature. (They're setting up for the next tribal block, of course.) Wizard Overlord? Wizard Illusion? Endbringer Illusion? She might be any variation on a whole slew of things, but mark my words: she'll have at least two creature types.
As someone who participated more than a little in the Blue/WOTC Love/Hate relationship thread, I have some impassioned opinions on this matter too; however, rather than voice those opinions, I'd like to talk about how we approach the topic of counterspell.
Blue players, in my opinion, are coming from a starkly different perspective than those people that want counterspell gone forever. Observing how blue has been progressing for the last several blocks, a pretty big color nerf has come into force; Wizards even admits that the took it too far in 9th. Regardless of whether the average aggro/burn player thinks it's true, a lot of the following would impact how much blue players yearn for old, reliable, iconic cards. Some of us note that lack of blue flavor, for example the fact that the representative blue tribe has changed every single set for the last three sets at least. (Wizards! Nevermind Wizards, Vedalken! No, Moonkin! No, vedalken with 2 fewer arms, or wildly overpriced creatures! Wait, wait; how about illusions!) We don't even know how many arms the fricking vedalken have, because they change every time we see them! The same can hardly be said for the other colors, with the standard goblins, soldiers, elves, zombies, horrors and the like remaining iconic within their colors across sets. Further, you cannot build a standard legal tribe out of the iconic tribes in other colors; for soldiers, there is only white, for elves only green, zombies only black, goblins only red, etc. However, the pseudoiconic blue tribe, wizards, can have a standard legal tribal deck in any mono color except green. By the logic of "if it's not green, it's iconic blue," I should be able to take a monoblue goblin deck to a tribal tournament, but this is not the case. Further, with a lot of the important cards in blue costing only a single U, our good cards get passed around like party favors; Compulsive Research, Keiga, Remands, Mana leaks, Repeals, Perilous Researches, Rune Snags, and Gifts Ungiven for everyone! Hell, let's make brainstorm into the most time consuming artifact ever! (Sensei's Divining Top) When any deck under the sun can run the blue power cards without any color fixing from rav block, something is up in the mind of the blue mage. Again, whether or not this is the case in the eyes of others, it is percieved as true by many people that play the color. As a result, they look for cards that have a history, great flavor, symbolic mechanics and cool art: like Counterspell.
Remembering the days of Draw/Go, players from other colors rightly recognize how un-fun that dynamic was and seek to avoid it at all costs. Whether or not the reintroduction of old cards necessarily returns the game to the bad old days is up for debate, seeing as there are plenty of counterexamples. (Hypnotic Specter was horrendously powerful back int he day, strong enough to need a banning; but it's in 9th and the game hasn;t imploded yet.) one thing that is worth pointing out though, is this: wanting back one card that was used in an entirely different environment to make the game unenjoyable DOES NOT MEAN that players want the old, unenjoyable atmosphere too. Perhaps there exist some narrow-minded people that think draw-go was good for the game, but I think most sensible people in all five colors agree that it wasn't. Jumping on anyone that suggests blue get back old toys with comments like "OMFG U R TEH NOOBEST" isn't helpful to anyone; it may be worth examining why blue players don't like the new cards in the first place.
Finally, a hint as to a widely-percieved hypocrisy on the part of those rejecting counterspell. So it's bad for a single two mana card to willdly warp a format, changing how decks can be made and played whilst mandating hate for the single card? Let's imagine making this situation worse, where the card in question can be played by anyone without a strict color commitment. And is available in a precon, perhaps. Yes, ladies and gentlemen, it rings false to say that a narrowly colored two mana card (Counterspell) is more dangerous to the game than a totally unrestricted, swiss army knife of a two mana artifact, Umezawa's Jitte. A card that, I think, should have been hated out of standard a long time ago for stunting deck diversity has seen a full rotation is fine, but the much more difficult to cast Counterspell is too good. This double standard aside, I think a lot of blue players are pissed off further in that it seems like a card that anyone can play, but isn't; it just isn't good without good creatures. Like, for example, in the color without good, efficiently costed creatures: blue. Everyone else gets something easy to play that can fill any role you please, and blue gets shafted because Grayscale Gharial is no Kird Ape. I personally think that this note about who the Fork of Doom is good for rings true; blue just doesn't get a watchwolf, or kird ape, or heirarch, or hound of konda, or fear creatures, or anything like it because creatures are not in blue's pie. However, regardless of the actual truth of that argument, its inherent believablility underscores one thing: people coming from the side of thinking "blue needs something blue's" believe they are balancing some serious shafting. Similarly, those people advocating Counterspell never see print ever again are trying to avoid the Bad Old Days; an unobjectionable aim. I suppose the point I am trying to drive home with this analysis of motivations is this one: rather than having lines and lines of quotes, narrow reparte, and sequential minutae, maybe we should respect the motivations of others, and try and address the underlying issues whose perception causes use to go on message boards and fervently argue about one card in millions.
Thank you, Wizards. Ancestral Visions is exactly the kind of card I have been looking for. Apparently Blue isn't totally on the chopping block after all.
I am a huge fan of this card, for all the obvious reasons and more. Anyone can play it, but it definitely plays best for those people that are making blue their main color. Thank you, Wizards; I am pleased.
Now if we can get a counterspell variant that doesn;t counter, but removes the spell from the game suspend for 4 or somesuch...
Simply as a response to RickCorgan, I can list several things I would be happy about, none of which are currently in Standard to my knowledge.
Firstly, the thing you didn't talk about at all: a blue tribe. I don't care how good or bad it is, I would like some creature to associate with the color, to knwo something about, to derive flavor from. Be it cephalids, vedalken, merfolk, or (please, oh please) Homarids, I really don't care; just make it consistent, relevant and interesting, WotC.
Second, something below game-winning-mana (5 converted cost) which is consistently useful, worth its cost, and geared toward the blue player rather than the splasher. I am quite pleased with counterbalance, even if it is almost completely reliant on the most time consuming artifact I have ever seen, Sensei's Diving Top. (As a side note, what will happen to Counterbalance deck when Top rotates? What indeed...) However, what blue has in this mana range, compared to the mechanics of other colors, just doesn't add up in my mind: Boomerang costs UU and a card for a one turn reprieve from one permanent, while Diabolic Tutor, Glorious Anthem, Troll Ascetic, and the like far better manifest their colors and power for a commitment of mana. I don't even want counterspell, per se; I would be fine with something like
Teferi's Meddling (UU, Instant, Rare)
------
Remove target spell from the game with four time counters on it. It has suspend 4.
It's countermagic that won't tear the game to shreds, but still manages a cool, flavorful effect.
Third on the list of things to make me happy: a blue protagonist, or at least non-antagonist. Name the last one and see what I mean. (For this experiment, Memnarch is blue.)
Fourth and final for the moment: cheaper effects and spells in blue, temporary if necessary. I don't care if it has phasing, fading or cumulative upkeep; just make the fun cards playable before the the game winning threshold of mana, meaning 5 or 6. Krovikan Whispers? A good card for this purpose, I am a fan. Teferi's Drake? Why not. Just something decent to fill up that time between the start of the game and when the good spells start. (Note how of the good blue spells you named, the cheapest were 5 mana.)
Part of what has me concerned: the rotation. With our nice finisher rotating, the one counterexample people use to show that blue has good cards, (Meloku, for the inattentive) there seems like there will be a gap in the playlist. As mentioned above, Counterbalance decks might have some trouble without the Top, and Gifts decks will have some trouble without their namesake card. Watchwolf, Heirarch, Helix, Mortify, Putrey, Ghost Council, Gruul cards, Simic cards, and the like won't be rotating; the event seems to pose little danger for those few decks that run these really weak cards, right?
Anycase, dealing with your post as a whole, even Wizards has mentioned in their articles that hmm, they took the great Blue nerf a little far. Blue arguably most powerful? All the lynchpin green cards beg to differ, and as previously noted: the blue cards getting heavy play are splash cards. Has blue been powerful in the past? Yes, and we all know it, but past differences don't change the central point: flavor and equality are good for the game, as it's not simply passing around the hat of pwning everyone else.
EDIT: Two notes: First, to resolve the "Wizards are blue, really!" business, a list, standard legal:
As a note, this list ignores multicolor cards, like Orzhov Guildmage, Boros Guildmage, Rakdos Augermage and so on.
And that Black Wizard bit:
Maga
Bob
Martyr of Bones
Sadistic Augermage
Smogsteed Rider
Thoughtpicker Witch
Try that trick with elves, or gobbos, or zombies, or elephants, or soldiers.
Second note: The state of the game and where I want it to go. Few people thinking of the interests of the game long for the days of "Draw, Go," and I am not among them; it's bad for the game as a whole. However, it is somewhat confusing to hear that blue can't have "good" creatures, (because it is antithetical to blue and stepping on green,) or good enchantments, (not blue, white's territory) or good lands (green again, or communal if things are colorless). Artifacts in the normal sense (as in not Memnarch) are definitionally for everyone, and have played in the pas to the weakest color for power reasons, making them weak. If not burn and not permanents, where can a blue deck truly excel besides "Draw, Go"? My solution: don't shaft blue totally, and either make the other colors share or develop some niche of permanents for blue to play. Hopefully, something that is not screwing up your own mana base.
Also, notice the uptick in cards that are uncounterable; wreak havoc comes to mind, though there are others. As for it being the only color that gets countermagic and draw, I repeat: they have only one U in the casting cost. Toss in some islands, Karoos, or a Dual Land and you're in business, regardless of color. This can hardly be said easily of the powers of other colors; Anthem, Ball Lightning variants, big & beefy creatures, the good black spells in discard and tutoring, etc.
I am a huge fan of point-by-point analysis, so here we go. My order doesn;t reflect yours for structural reasons, so bear with me.
Starting with the identity crisis that we can agree upon, what does this mean to blue as a color? Is any other color going through an identity crisis? Let's see: snakes and beasts, check, soldiers and knights, check, goblins, barbarians and minotaur? Zombies, horrors, ghosts (potentially of councils) and such? They're all there and associated with their colors. Blue has none of this, and the "best answer" as you put it is Wizards. I don't think you looked up "guildmage" like I suggested; to spoil the big surprise for everyone, of all the guildmages ever (not jsut the ten we know and love,) three are not wizards. Three. At the point where WOTC has basically said "wizards for everybody!," they begin to look like a neutral tribe, like "human." So simply as a matter of empirical fact and agreed upon premises, blue flavor is in the can at the very least. As for the difficulty of a blue tribe not meaning something is wrong, imagine green without elves or beasts; it would be a less flavorful, less interesting color, less interesting color as a result. For those that actually care about blue, shafting the color this way seems unfair and wrong. Give us kraken, or merfolk, or birds, or homarids (Homarids FTW!) for God's sake; anything is better than nothing.
Next we look into those cards that take blue in new directions, rather than just suckily filling old roles or being overcosted (Tidespout Tyrant.) Obviously, with no real creature theme, something has to set the bar and the unique cards would be the best candidates. The basic fact is that even these new, different rares provide no real flavor or utility for blue as a color, and this kind of sucks on balance. For those people that don't like seeing their color suffer, this sucks a lot.
But how about those abilities you say define blue: stealing, bounce, countering and draw. Think of a steal card in blue that's standard legal, go. I got Confiscate, Keiga, Commandeer and the more questionable Spawnbroker. Setting aside Spawnbroker as a card that results in a net loss most of the time, we have Commandeer (blech) and two six mana cards. Two. At six mana each. Crossapply all my analysis in post #16 as to why expensive cards hardly define a color. When you think of Green, do you think of Nature's Path? I thought not.
Next comes bounce, that much loved mechanic. For the low, low price of UU, you too can have an extra turn without a target permanent in play... only to get beaten down by the one mana 2/3 (Kird Ape) from turn 1. Compare this iconic mechanic to burn, group buffing, tutoring, or ubercreatures; I think we all know what would be at the bottom of a power list there.
Finally, counter and card draw. I think there are some things we can agree are not easily splashable, such as Ghost Council of Orzhova, Utopia sprawl, Sakura Tribe Elder, Shock, Ball Lightning and all of its variants, Glorious Anthem, Isamaru, Hound of Konda, Phyrexian Arena and so on. Name the good blue cards; Oh wait, I did in post #16. Keiga, Remand, Rune Snag, Compulsive/Perilous Research... Seemingly, these cards encompass all of what's left in blue: stealing at high cost, card draw, and countermagic. Common theme: they all only need a single U. All of them, without exception. This seems to, again, leave the last few things blue open to everyone; the remaining core of blueness is communal. In addition to all the erosion of the pie we agreed on, like Ohran Viper and Glare, how could this perfect storm of color nerf NOT make blue mages protest the general slaughter of their color?
I don;t think that I am alone when I say that blue has gotten somewhat shortchanged on several levels, and it is this feeling that causes blue mages to pine for the old days. In particular I mean a demotion to a splash color, destroying the blue theme, and not actually replacing what was removed with anything.
The first point I think is pretty obvious; name the blue cards that are actually playable. How many of them actually require a big commitment in blue? As listed elsehwhere, Keiga, Remand, Mana Leak, Compulsive/Perilous Research, Rune Snag, Spell Snare, and the like all have a single U in their casting cost. Anyone and everyone can have a piece of blue's pie, with no money down and no additional fee! Blue as a color unto itself, not necessarily in a mono deck, but as a color, has had a lot of stuff taken from it with a notable exception.
These are the things I am talking about when I say removal of the blue theme, and they're quite obvious if you care about blue like a blue mage would. Name the iconic green tribe. If you said beasts, elves, or anything on down to spiders, congrats on being aware of the obvious. Red? Goblins all the way, even in sets where weird crap is going on (I'm looking at you, Kamigawa.) White? Soldiers, knights, angels, and the like. Black has zombies and horrors and such. All of these tribes see play outside fo tribal, and are pretty clearly associated with their colors; it feels right for those groups to belong to those colors and vice versa.
Now name the blue tribe(s). I'll wait.
Kraken? At nine mana or better, I can only scoff at such a suggestion. Leviathans? I think the least expensive one requires 5 mana... and all of your permanents. In much the same way as how it's difficult to associate Green with Crashes of Rhinos, I think it's somewhat difficult to claim that a color is represented by cards too expensive to actually be played with frequency, even in casual games. As for the Soratami, think about this. Everyone can guess what elves, goblins, zombies, soldiers, and such are like; tell me about the soratami. Who are they? What do they mean to the color? From what I gather, they were intent on blowing up the world. However, you wouldn;t guess it from the cards, and I certainly didn't as someone who was paying attention to the blue creature type. Wizards are now basically everyone's, just look up "guildmage" in gatherer and see what I mean. Birds? Birds are white, and I think all recently printings reflect this. This leaves us with two groups, one of which are the cephalids that haven't seen print in years. Finally, vedalken suffer from much the same thing as the Soratami; we knew something about them in Mirrodin, but as it turns out that was just a fluke. They don't even actually have four arms. In the realm of creatures, flavor has been systemically eviscerated form blue; just count back the last four printings of merfolk as an example.
This has also happened with blue's abilities, to a degree. Setting aside the sheer splashability of blue's good cards, go check out Ray Of Command. Find something similar today. You won't, for one simple reason: that ability is now red, ex Threaten. Tutoring? Black is best, better than the "knowledge" color. Opposition has become Glare of Subdual, and so on down the line. The instant Ophidian became green, (Ohran Viper,) I think everyone paying attention saw another facet of blue being eroded away.
However, all of these things are not necessarily bad. Should the essence of a color be pureed and sucked out with a straw, that might be somewhat more acceptable if it was actually replaced with something. Red losing The Bolt was made more acceptable by diversification within the color; Incinerate followed, and then Shock later. What has blue's essence been traded in for? Nuking your own mana base. The experiment started with the Soratami, and has become a full blown theme with Jokulmorder, Walk of Aeons, Perilous Research and Sky Swallower. Maybe I am way out on a limb on this one, but I think exchanging a blue mages tricks and power for watered down splash cards and a tendency to copulate furiously with oneself is a little off-putting.
This is all simply within the color of blue; the stuff everyone else is getting is also annoying to a generic blue mage. When everyone else is geting a raise, just staying in place is effectively a demotion, in addition to all the other shortcomings blue has been given. The most hated, flat out dumbest 2 mana artifact in a while, Umezawa's Jitte, was a flat out boon to aggro decks and stunted deck diversity by mandating Jitte hate. At the point where all the costs on a card could be doubled and still have it be ok, something is wrong; however this card eluded the banhammer for its entire run. If you were running with the color you love to play, would you be more than a little pissed that everyone got a cool toy except you? You could use it, but almost all blue creatures are objectively worse than their other-color counterparts. At that point, you'd get run over by the people using their stronger cards. In addition, there are things like Watchwolf, Lightning Helix, Mortify, Putrefy, Burning tree Shaman, Rumbling Slum, Wrecking Ball... I think my point is made.
Yes, a bunch of decks use blue, but few of them are actualy blue decks; transmute helps heartbeat, but heartbeat would roll over and die without green. Without blue, it might actually win sometimes. This general idea plays out in other areas too; blue is a boon to the deck's win percentage, but not the reason why the percentage is possible in the first place.
Looking at all of these factors as a blue player would, what would you conclude? Wizards is sticking it royally to my favorite color. The one color that I want to play above all others, in come cases the one color I want to play period.
Can you blame blue players for wanting something that's blue's, and perhaps looking to the past for an idea? Perhaps for an iconic card that was fun to play in the past? Perhaps Counterspell?
Thoughtweft Trio.
This set looks fantastic for limited; the picture may be incomplete, but the level of board interactivity in games looks impressive. Whether or not plane shifting/these power levels are a cash-grab on the part of Wizards is, in my opinion, a moot point given how interesting and fun these cards look like they will be. Also, if these (very impressive, interesting) cards are uncommons, I want to see what the red or blue non-cycle rares will be like.
Blue players, in my opinion, are coming from a starkly different perspective than those people that want counterspell gone forever. Observing how blue has been progressing for the last several blocks, a pretty big color nerf has come into force; Wizards even admits that the took it too far in 9th. Regardless of whether the average aggro/burn player thinks it's true, a lot of the following would impact how much blue players yearn for old, reliable, iconic cards. Some of us note that lack of blue flavor, for example the fact that the representative blue tribe has changed every single set for the last three sets at least. (Wizards! Nevermind Wizards, Vedalken! No, Moonkin! No, vedalken with 2 fewer arms, or wildly overpriced creatures! Wait, wait; how about illusions!) We don't even know how many arms the fricking vedalken have, because they change every time we see them! The same can hardly be said for the other colors, with the standard goblins, soldiers, elves, zombies, horrors and the like remaining iconic within their colors across sets. Further, you cannot build a standard legal tribe out of the iconic tribes in other colors; for soldiers, there is only white, for elves only green, zombies only black, goblins only red, etc. However, the pseudoiconic blue tribe, wizards, can have a standard legal tribal deck in any mono color except green. By the logic of "if it's not green, it's iconic blue," I should be able to take a monoblue goblin deck to a tribal tournament, but this is not the case. Further, with a lot of the important cards in blue costing only a single U, our good cards get passed around like party favors; Compulsive Research, Keiga, Remands, Mana leaks, Repeals, Perilous Researches, Rune Snags, and Gifts Ungiven for everyone! Hell, let's make brainstorm into the most time consuming artifact ever! (Sensei's Divining Top) When any deck under the sun can run the blue power cards without any color fixing from rav block, something is up in the mind of the blue mage. Again, whether or not this is the case in the eyes of others, it is percieved as true by many people that play the color. As a result, they look for cards that have a history, great flavor, symbolic mechanics and cool art: like Counterspell.
Remembering the days of Draw/Go, players from other colors rightly recognize how un-fun that dynamic was and seek to avoid it at all costs. Whether or not the reintroduction of old cards necessarily returns the game to the bad old days is up for debate, seeing as there are plenty of counterexamples. (Hypnotic Specter was horrendously powerful back int he day, strong enough to need a banning; but it's in 9th and the game hasn;t imploded yet.) one thing that is worth pointing out though, is this: wanting back one card that was used in an entirely different environment to make the game unenjoyable DOES NOT MEAN that players want the old, unenjoyable atmosphere too. Perhaps there exist some narrow-minded people that think draw-go was good for the game, but I think most sensible people in all five colors agree that it wasn't. Jumping on anyone that suggests blue get back old toys with comments like "OMFG U R TEH NOOBEST" isn't helpful to anyone; it may be worth examining why blue players don't like the new cards in the first place.
Finally, a hint as to a widely-percieved hypocrisy on the part of those rejecting counterspell. So it's bad for a single two mana card to willdly warp a format, changing how decks can be made and played whilst mandating hate for the single card? Let's imagine making this situation worse, where the card in question can be played by anyone without a strict color commitment. And is available in a precon, perhaps. Yes, ladies and gentlemen, it rings false to say that a narrowly colored two mana card (Counterspell) is more dangerous to the game than a totally unrestricted, swiss army knife of a two mana artifact, Umezawa's Jitte. A card that, I think, should have been hated out of standard a long time ago for stunting deck diversity has seen a full rotation is fine, but the much more difficult to cast Counterspell is too good. This double standard aside, I think a lot of blue players are pissed off further in that it seems like a card that anyone can play, but isn't; it just isn't good without good creatures. Like, for example, in the color without good, efficiently costed creatures: blue. Everyone else gets something easy to play that can fill any role you please, and blue gets shafted because Grayscale Gharial is no Kird Ape. I personally think that this note about who the Fork of Doom is good for rings true; blue just doesn't get a watchwolf, or kird ape, or heirarch, or hound of konda, or fear creatures, or anything like it because creatures are not in blue's pie. However, regardless of the actual truth of that argument, its inherent believablility underscores one thing: people coming from the side of thinking "blue needs something blue's" believe they are balancing some serious shafting. Similarly, those people advocating Counterspell never see print ever again are trying to avoid the Bad Old Days; an unobjectionable aim. I suppose the point I am trying to drive home with this analysis of motivations is this one: rather than having lines and lines of quotes, narrow reparte, and sequential minutae, maybe we should respect the motivations of others, and try and address the underlying issues whose perception causes use to go on message boards and fervently argue about one card in millions.
Now if we can get a counterspell variant that doesn;t counter, but removes the spell from the game suspend for 4 or somesuch...
Firstly, the thing you didn't talk about at all: a blue tribe. I don't care how good or bad it is, I would like some creature to associate with the color, to knwo something about, to derive flavor from. Be it cephalids, vedalken, merfolk, or (please, oh please) Homarids, I really don't care; just make it consistent, relevant and interesting, WotC.
Second, something below game-winning-mana (5 converted cost) which is consistently useful, worth its cost, and geared toward the blue player rather than the splasher. I am quite pleased with counterbalance, even if it is almost completely reliant on the most time consuming artifact I have ever seen, Sensei's Diving Top. (As a side note, what will happen to Counterbalance deck when Top rotates? What indeed...) However, what blue has in this mana range, compared to the mechanics of other colors, just doesn't add up in my mind: Boomerang costs UU and a card for a one turn reprieve from one permanent, while Diabolic Tutor, Glorious Anthem, Troll Ascetic, and the like far better manifest their colors and power for a commitment of mana. I don't even want counterspell, per se; I would be fine with something like
Teferi's Meddling (UU, Instant, Rare)
------
Remove target spell from the game with four time counters on it. It has suspend 4.
It's countermagic that won't tear the game to shreds, but still manages a cool, flavorful effect.
Third on the list of things to make me happy: a blue protagonist, or at least non-antagonist. Name the last one and see what I mean. (For this experiment, Memnarch is blue.)
Fourth and final for the moment: cheaper effects and spells in blue, temporary if necessary. I don't care if it has phasing, fading or cumulative upkeep; just make the fun cards playable before the the game winning threshold of mana, meaning 5 or 6. Krovikan Whispers? A good card for this purpose, I am a fan. Teferi's Drake? Why not. Just something decent to fill up that time between the start of the game and when the good spells start. (Note how of the good blue spells you named, the cheapest were 5 mana.)
Part of what has me concerned: the rotation. With our nice finisher rotating, the one counterexample people use to show that blue has good cards, (Meloku, for the inattentive) there seems like there will be a gap in the playlist. As mentioned above, Counterbalance decks might have some trouble without the Top, and Gifts decks will have some trouble without their namesake card. Watchwolf, Heirarch, Helix, Mortify, Putrey, Ghost Council, Gruul cards, Simic cards, and the like won't be rotating; the event seems to pose little danger for those few decks that run these really weak cards, right?
Anycase, dealing with your post as a whole, even Wizards has mentioned in their articles that hmm, they took the great Blue nerf a little far. Blue arguably most powerful? All the lynchpin green cards beg to differ, and as previously noted: the blue cards getting heavy play are splash cards. Has blue been powerful in the past? Yes, and we all know it, but past differences don't change the central point: flavor and equality are good for the game, as it's not simply passing around the hat of pwning everyone else.
EDIT: Two notes: First, to resolve the "Wizards are blue, really!" business, a list, standard legal:
As a note, this list ignores multicolor cards, like Orzhov Guildmage, Boros Guildmage, Rakdos Augermage and so on.
White:
Spelltithe Enforcer
Kitsune Mystic
Kitsune Riftwalker
Auratouched Mage
Red:
Sparkmage Apprentice
Wojek Embermage
Obre Savant
And that Black Wizard bit:
Maga
Bob
Martyr of Bones
Sadistic Augermage
Smogsteed Rider
Thoughtpicker Witch
Try that trick with elves, or gobbos, or zombies, or elephants, or soldiers.
Second note: The state of the game and where I want it to go. Few people thinking of the interests of the game long for the days of "Draw, Go," and I am not among them; it's bad for the game as a whole. However, it is somewhat confusing to hear that blue can't have "good" creatures, (because it is antithetical to blue and stepping on green,) or good enchantments, (not blue, white's territory) or good lands (green again, or communal if things are colorless). Artifacts in the normal sense (as in not Memnarch) are definitionally for everyone, and have played in the pas to the weakest color for power reasons, making them weak. If not burn and not permanents, where can a blue deck truly excel besides "Draw, Go"? My solution: don't shaft blue totally, and either make the other colors share or develop some niche of permanents for blue to play. Hopefully, something that is not screwing up your own mana base.
Starting with the identity crisis that we can agree upon, what does this mean to blue as a color? Is any other color going through an identity crisis? Let's see: snakes and beasts, check, soldiers and knights, check, goblins, barbarians and minotaur? Zombies, horrors, ghosts (potentially of councils) and such? They're all there and associated with their colors. Blue has none of this, and the "best answer" as you put it is Wizards. I don't think you looked up "guildmage" like I suggested; to spoil the big surprise for everyone, of all the guildmages ever (not jsut the ten we know and love,) three are not wizards. Three. At the point where WOTC has basically said "wizards for everybody!," they begin to look like a neutral tribe, like "human." So simply as a matter of empirical fact and agreed upon premises, blue flavor is in the can at the very least. As for the difficulty of a blue tribe not meaning something is wrong, imagine green without elves or beasts; it would be a less flavorful, less interesting color, less interesting color as a result. For those that actually care about blue, shafting the color this way seems unfair and wrong. Give us kraken, or merfolk, or birds, or homarids (Homarids FTW!) for God's sake; anything is better than nothing.
Next we look into those cards that take blue in new directions, rather than just suckily filling old roles or being overcosted (Tidespout Tyrant.) Obviously, with no real creature theme, something has to set the bar and the unique cards would be the best candidates. The basic fact is that even these new, different rares provide no real flavor or utility for blue as a color, and this kind of sucks on balance. For those people that don't like seeing their color suffer, this sucks a lot.
But how about those abilities you say define blue: stealing, bounce, countering and draw. Think of a steal card in blue that's standard legal, go. I got Confiscate, Keiga, Commandeer and the more questionable Spawnbroker. Setting aside Spawnbroker as a card that results in a net loss most of the time, we have Commandeer (blech) and two six mana cards. Two. At six mana each. Crossapply all my analysis in post #16 as to why expensive cards hardly define a color. When you think of Green, do you think of Nature's Path? I thought not.
Next comes bounce, that much loved mechanic. For the low, low price of UU, you too can have an extra turn without a target permanent in play... only to get beaten down by the one mana 2/3 (Kird Ape) from turn 1. Compare this iconic mechanic to burn, group buffing, tutoring, or ubercreatures; I think we all know what would be at the bottom of a power list there.
Finally, counter and card draw. I think there are some things we can agree are not easily splashable, such as Ghost Council of Orzhova, Utopia sprawl, Sakura Tribe Elder, Shock, Ball Lightning and all of its variants, Glorious Anthem, Isamaru, Hound of Konda, Phyrexian Arena and so on. Name the good blue cards; Oh wait, I did in post #16. Keiga, Remand, Rune Snag, Compulsive/Perilous Research... Seemingly, these cards encompass all of what's left in blue: stealing at high cost, card draw, and countermagic. Common theme: they all only need a single U. All of them, without exception. This seems to, again, leave the last few things blue open to everyone; the remaining core of blueness is communal. In addition to all the erosion of the pie we agreed on, like Ohran Viper and Glare, how could this perfect storm of color nerf NOT make blue mages protest the general slaughter of their color?
The first point I think is pretty obvious; name the blue cards that are actually playable. How many of them actually require a big commitment in blue? As listed elsehwhere, Keiga, Remand, Mana Leak, Compulsive/Perilous Research, Rune Snag, Spell Snare, and the like all have a single U in their casting cost. Anyone and everyone can have a piece of blue's pie, with no money down and no additional fee! Blue as a color unto itself, not necessarily in a mono deck, but as a color, has had a lot of stuff taken from it with a notable exception.
These are the things I am talking about when I say removal of the blue theme, and they're quite obvious if you care about blue like a blue mage would. Name the iconic green tribe. If you said beasts, elves, or anything on down to spiders, congrats on being aware of the obvious. Red? Goblins all the way, even in sets where weird crap is going on (I'm looking at you, Kamigawa.) White? Soldiers, knights, angels, and the like. Black has zombies and horrors and such. All of these tribes see play outside fo tribal, and are pretty clearly associated with their colors; it feels right for those groups to belong to those colors and vice versa.
Now name the blue tribe(s). I'll wait.
Kraken? At nine mana or better, I can only scoff at such a suggestion. Leviathans? I think the least expensive one requires 5 mana... and all of your permanents. In much the same way as how it's difficult to associate Green with Crashes of Rhinos, I think it's somewhat difficult to claim that a color is represented by cards too expensive to actually be played with frequency, even in casual games. As for the Soratami, think about this. Everyone can guess what elves, goblins, zombies, soldiers, and such are like; tell me about the soratami. Who are they? What do they mean to the color? From what I gather, they were intent on blowing up the world. However, you wouldn;t guess it from the cards, and I certainly didn't as someone who was paying attention to the blue creature type. Wizards are now basically everyone's, just look up "guildmage" in gatherer and see what I mean. Birds? Birds are white, and I think all recently printings reflect this. This leaves us with two groups, one of which are the cephalids that haven't seen print in years. Finally, vedalken suffer from much the same thing as the Soratami; we knew something about them in Mirrodin, but as it turns out that was just a fluke. They don't even actually have four arms. In the realm of creatures, flavor has been systemically eviscerated form blue; just count back the last four printings of merfolk as an example.
This has also happened with blue's abilities, to a degree. Setting aside the sheer splashability of blue's good cards, go check out Ray Of Command. Find something similar today. You won't, for one simple reason: that ability is now red, ex Threaten. Tutoring? Black is best, better than the "knowledge" color. Opposition has become Glare of Subdual, and so on down the line. The instant Ophidian became green, (Ohran Viper,) I think everyone paying attention saw another facet of blue being eroded away.
However, all of these things are not necessarily bad. Should the essence of a color be pureed and sucked out with a straw, that might be somewhat more acceptable if it was actually replaced with something. Red losing The Bolt was made more acceptable by diversification within the color; Incinerate followed, and then Shock later. What has blue's essence been traded in for? Nuking your own mana base. The experiment started with the Soratami, and has become a full blown theme with Jokulmorder, Walk of Aeons, Perilous Research and Sky Swallower. Maybe I am way out on a limb on this one, but I think exchanging a blue mages tricks and power for watered down splash cards and a tendency to copulate furiously with oneself is a little off-putting.
This is all simply within the color of blue; the stuff everyone else is getting is also annoying to a generic blue mage. When everyone else is geting a raise, just staying in place is effectively a demotion, in addition to all the other shortcomings blue has been given. The most hated, flat out dumbest 2 mana artifact in a while, Umezawa's Jitte, was a flat out boon to aggro decks and stunted deck diversity by mandating Jitte hate. At the point where all the costs on a card could be doubled and still have it be ok, something is wrong; however this card eluded the banhammer for its entire run. If you were running with the color you love to play, would you be more than a little pissed that everyone got a cool toy except you? You could use it, but almost all blue creatures are objectively worse than their other-color counterparts. At that point, you'd get run over by the people using their stronger cards. In addition, there are things like Watchwolf, Lightning Helix, Mortify, Putrefy, Burning tree Shaman, Rumbling Slum, Wrecking Ball... I think my point is made.
Yes, a bunch of decks use blue, but few of them are actualy blue decks; transmute helps heartbeat, but heartbeat would roll over and die without green. Without blue, it might actually win sometimes. This general idea plays out in other areas too; blue is a boon to the deck's win percentage, but not the reason why the percentage is possible in the first place.
Looking at all of these factors as a blue player would, what would you conclude? Wizards is sticking it royally to my favorite color. The one color that I want to play above all others, in come cases the one color I want to play period.
Can you blame blue players for wanting something that's blue's, and perhaps looking to the past for an idea? Perhaps for an iconic card that was fun to play in the past? Perhaps Counterspell?