Counterspells in Multiplayer

Another subject that I seemingly never get to talk about is the notion of playing counterspells in multiplayer. While I no doubt have a somewhat controversial opinion on the subject, I still feel as though it's important to discuss what is it and why I feel that way. While I realize that my logic and experiences won't apply to everyone, I still feel as though some people will be able to learn from them.

Let's cut right to the chase. I don't think that counter decks are favored to win in "fair" multiplayer metas which consist of players who have roughly equivalent skill levels and who have fairly similar card collections. Factors such as those can always skew things wildly, which is why I never take them into consideration. I know that I use this disclaimer a lot, it just always irks when I see people saying things along the lines of "you're wrong, my deck with Moxen and Tinker and such crushed my little brother's White Weenie deck." Rant aside, I believe that the idea of playing a draw-go deck that holds mana up for counters and draw spells (instead of tapping out to commit threats at Sorcery speed) cannot function in a true multiplayer setting where players are actively trying to win. While it may be a fine duel archetype, it has too much working against it once the number of opposing players increases beyond 1.

Someone playing a dedicated counter deck (i.e. one with 8 or more hard counters) is doomed to lose in my mind. While they will almost inevitably "take someone out with them," I've never seen the draw-go style deck actually win a multiplayer game. It, much like many other duel decks, simply doesn't have the necessary tools to do so. You are probably going to hinder 1-2 players by a significant margin and you'll probably cause one of them to lose in the end, but that's a far cry from winning yourself. You aren't playing to win; you're just playing to pick someone else as the winner. This is why I believe that counterspells are completely overvalued in a multiplayer setting.

Let's expand on that thought for a bit. The inherent problem with counters that they're 1-for-1s that cannot handle resolved threats. 1-for-1s are terrible in the context of a multiplayer setting because you'll never be able to effectively match threats with answers. That is, you will run out of cards long before your opponents do. While I appreciate the fact running some number of 1-for-1s can be a necessary evil, it should almost never be your primary reactive gameplan. The burden will be on you to produce a more permanent solution to the problem. Band-aids can only stem the bleeding for so long after all. Players actively trying to win will bash into an open player and a counter deck just plain isn't going to keep the field clear. Their inability to handle resolved threats is quite devastating as well. Remember, counters are great when you're ahead on the board and can hold your mana up instead of committing more to it. While this is easily manageable in duels, you will rarely-if-ever be ahead enough on the board while playing a Blue deck in a multiplayer setting. As such you will be often be forced (more or less) to tap out on a regular basis in order to commit threats and maintain board parity.

There is also the issue of timing. Your opponents all get to act before you do and so it's virtually impossible to "guess correctly" with respect to countering moderate threats (i.e. not game-ending ones). Even if you can counter one player's spell(s) it's unlikely that you'll be able to stop the ones from the following players. This is especially worrisome since you have no idea whether or not you're even countering the most relevant threat that going to be played that circuit. As such, counters have to be pre-emptively used are often expended on threats that may or may not have been an issue/the biggest issue in the first place. Again, removal circumvents many of these problems due to its reactive nature. Pro-active spells such as counters do not have that luxury.

This is an issue where tempo plays against the card. Counters are powerful because you can often trade your 2 mana for their 6 mana which often means that you can even play a threat on your own turn. The problem is that that sort of tempo play doesn't have nearly as much impact in a big Chaos game. Every other player can still play a 6 mana threat and so your 4 mana threat isn't nearly as impressive as it could have been. You can't seal the game in your favor like you could if it were just 2 decks trying to curve out against each other. Remember, counters are "paying" for that tempo-ness since they don't have much value once you're behind on board. Given that you're incredibly unlikely to ever be significantly ahead in a multiplayer game, you can't effectively create those situations where a counter or two just wins you the game while you beat in with your army over a few turns. You assume all of the risks and can rarely yield any of the benefits.

What this means is that counters are often worse than 1-for-1 removal spells. Not always, but often. This is because removal can be used before and after a threat is cast, not just before. This, again, is relevant in a setting where you're probably being forced to tap out and add to your board in order to maintain parity. You can't stop everything anyways, so you may as well give yourself the best shot to hit cards that matter to you. Bear in mind that you can often sandbag a removal spell until a threat becomes an actual concern for yourself. While counters are often "forced out early," removal can usually be held until the last possible second.

Now, there are some exceptions. Removal can't stop an Exsanguinate for 20 after all, nor is it likely to save you from an Insurrection. Because of this, counters will always have a time and a place. That being said, people just plain don't use them right.

First of all, people use too many of them in my mind. You don't need 8 copies of something if you just need it to stop that turn 15 Exsanguinate. You can probably easily get away with playing 4 and never look back. Beyond that, people aren't playing the right kinds of counters. The ones that I advocate playing are things like Arcane Denial, Dream Fracture and Dismiss. Simply put, I don't see a reason not to. Arcane Denial is only scary if you're oblivious to your relative position in the game to begin with. The other players are already up a hundred cards on you and it's pointless to worry about another 1 or 2. Again, you're not countering everything that someone is trying to play. You're probably just trying to stop those haymakers that will end the session outright. As such, you may as well get your extra card out of the deal and let your opponent have his random card. Could it be another game-ender? Sure. Still, don't let hindsight bother you too much. If he was drawing another "win" spell in a few turns then the extra draw probably didn't change much anyways. He probably would have won regardless.

The main thing is that cantrip counters A) counter those game-ender perfectly fine but B) don't screw-over your own chances to win. You can still actively pursue some "plan A" to win and not lose a bunch of cards and resources in the process. It's not just about stopping player X from winning. You can do that while actively digging for your on bombs. You should always be looking to further your position in the game in a fashion that isn't just treading water and surviving. There's no prize for second and so you may as well play for first. That means making every card count.

Finally, as a bit of an aside, you can even "cycle" a card like Arcane Denial in a pinch to dig relatively far for a spell. I know that this seems minor, but it comes up more than you probably think. Again, you realistically shouldn't need a counter on turn 4 or whatever so it's sometimes to nice to be able to pitch a spell to it and draw 3 new cards. Is it better than Thirst for Knowledge or whatever? No. Still, it has the option to act like one (kinda) in a pinch.

Anyways, I hope that this entry has enlightened some people as to why I actively dislike counter-heavy decks in a multiplayer setting. The draw-go style is a fool's errand to pursue in my opinion, especially since people tend to play the wrong amounts and the wrong kinds of counters. While I'm sure we all remember times where counters annoyed us, I wonder how many times the people casting them actually go on to win. If it's anything similar to what I've experienced then it's probably not many of them. If you are going to play with them then you may as well spring for the extra card and ignore the potential downsides of paying more mana or giving someone a random card or two. It's a drop in the bucket compared to how far you behind you are card-wise after all.
4
Prid3's avatar
Prid3

Comments

  • To post a comment, please or register a new account.
Posts Quoted:
Reply
Clear All Quotes