Trends and Clones in the history of Magic.

[DÛke]

I have seen, and played many Magic cards, and I'm sure you guys and girls have too.

Over the time, and this is natural, Magic gains a "clone" card, also known as "watered down version". "Clone" cards are cards like Snap, which "clones" Unsummon.
Snap and Unsummon are basically the "same" cards; Snap being a bit twisted.

There are many, and maybe, countless "clone" cards in Magic.
Unsummon vs. Seal of Removal vs. Snap is just a small example.

Some of these "clones" are also "trends".
Visions, for example had an angel, the Archangel.
Stronghold, also being the second set of the block, had an angel, Warrior Angel.
Urza's Legacy, again, being the second set of the block, had an angel, Radiant, Archangel.
And finally, Nemesis, sharing the same characteristics of the others, also gave us an angel, Blinding Angel.

Other trends could be the "counter unless..." trends.
Stronghold had Mana Leak.
Urza's Legacy had Miscalculation.
Nemesis had Daze.
(If the trend continues, we'll get a counter that says: "counter target spell unless opponent pays 0 ).

Now, for the good part; my question is, between play testing, playing, and just looking at the cards, I have gain knowledge about them. I gained the ability to tell which card of the whole "clone wars" is the best.

I am interested in your opinion too.
Here's a small analysis about some of my favorite "clones":

Snap versus Unsummon: I'll take Snap any day. Is one turn really a major problem? Not really. I'll wait a turn, and play a Snap for free.

Snap versus Seal of Removal: I'll play Seal of Removal. Sure, it's not free, but whenever I get it, I'll play it, and just let it sit there until I need to use it. Unlike Unsummon versus Seal of Removal is more versatile.

Seal of Removal versus Unsummon: See above.

Mana Leak versus Miscalculation: This should be a very hard one to answer. Mana leak is much more effective, but late game, it's very useless unless you have multiples. Miscalculation, however, can be 'Cycled' to give you a better option. I'll leave this one to you.

Mana Leak versus Daze: Mana Leak for sure. Daze is only good on the first, and maybe the second turn. There's a chance for use after that, but it, just like Force Spike, fail to gain the attention. ACC might be tempting for some, but do you really want to play such mind games? Why not just play a Mana Leak and get it over with.

Miscalculation versus Daze: See above.

Expunge versus Terror: 100% Expunge. Terror could become useless in many situations, and I mean many!
Expunge can't become useless thanks for Cycling. I have used Expunge so many times; I have even used it over Snuff Out many times.

Expunge versus Snuff Out: Again, I'll go with Expunge. There's nothing like the versatility of the Expunge. Snuff Out, just like Terror, could become useless many times. Although the ACC could be a very luring matter, I find Cycling even more tempting.

Snuff Out versus Terror: Kind of a hard choice, but, I'll go with Snuff Out. The only thing that could beat Snuff Out is Expunge and Diabolic Edict. Terror, with the low cost, doesn't tempt me at all. Snuff Out is much more playable in my opinion.

There are more trends, and more "clones", so feel free to comment any of the ones I failed to mention, just keep in mind to be serious .

"Will there be another angel in Plane Shift? If you ask me, I'll say: 100% ."

 

[Duel]

Yep

Mystic veil vs. robe of mirrors: Mystic veil is better, as it can act as an instant, and one mana makes very little difference

Mystic veil vs. Alexi's cloak: Alexi's cloak is just better. Alexi's cloak is to mystic veil as cho-manno's blessing is to ward of lights.

Robe of mirrors vs. Alexi's cloak: Alexi's cloak, se above

Diplomatic immunity vs. Alexi's cloak: Ouch! I dunno. someone else choose. I think that Alexi's cloak is better, as it can be played quicker than a destroying spell.

Stone rain vs. Lay waste: Stone rain. Very rarely will LD be unneccessary.

Cho-manno's blessing vs. Ward of lights: See mystic veil vs. Alexi's cloak.

 

[DÛke]

...think that Alexi's Cloack is much better than Diplomatic Immunity for many reasons. First of all, and the most important, the Cloak is basically a Counterspell for your creatures; it offers good protection too.

Diplomatic Imunity is great, but how often do you have something that destorys these enchantments anyway? Only white and green. That's it.

The instant speed of the Cloak is good against Red and Black, which are, in the first place, more dangerout than Green and White.

 

[Purple_jester]

Let's see... I agree with most of what you said regarding the black slayer spells, but I think Expunge is beaten by both Snuff Out and Dark Banishing. While Expunge can be cycled, that still doesn't do much against artifact creatures. I'd feel really silly if I had an Expunge in hand and I was looking at Karn, Phyrexian Colossus or Masticore.

Other trends:

Lightning Bolt vs. Incinerate vs. Guerilla Tactics vs. Shock vs. Seal of Fire
The winner of this set is Lightning Bolt, hands down. The economy of 3 damage for 1 mana beats anything here. Incinerate comes in at a close second for being able to get rid of annoyances like Eron the Relentless, Chilling Apparition and Cadaverous Knight.

Counterspell vs. Mana Drain vs. Arcane Denial vs. Mana Leak vs. Miscalculation
In the league of 2cc counters, nothing gets better than Mana drain, which provides blue that extra bit of mana it needs to speed itself up. Counterspell comes up as the eternal #2.

Force of Will vs. Foil
There's no comparison. Force of Will is 2 cards for 1, while Foil requires 3 cards. This requires Foil to be combined with the return-islands ACC counters to be truly effective. Force of Will sees itself not only in pure blue decks, but also in many multi-colored decks.

Swords to Plowshares vs. Exile vs. Reprisal vs. Afterlife
The sheer annihilation of a creature for 1 mana makes the Swords the winner here. the opponent gaining life is a minor setback by comparison. Exile comes at a close second though.

There's more out ther, but I've got an exam coming up.

 

[Apollo]

Well, I'm gonna have to disagree with DUke on a couple counts.

Snap vs. Seal of Removal: no offense, but this is a simple choice. Snap wins hands down. The main advantage to the Seals is that you can play them when you have the spare mana and then wait around until you need it. But Snap is free. You just wait until you would use the Seal, and play Snap for free. Look at it this way: Seal needs a one-time payment of 2 mana, while Snap needs no payment (technically, it does, but you all know what I mean). In addition, your opponent will see the Seal coming a mile away, while Snap has surprise value.

Expunge vs. Snuff Out: Snuff Out wins this one, and I think most will agree with me. Sure, Expunge can cycle, but it won't help you when you're facing down a Masticore. You aren't going to cycle to an answer, because black doesn't have one unless you're playing with Snuff Out or other removal spell. And Snuff Out is rarely useless; even the popular mono-black decks all run Masticores. And when you add in the ACC, I think Snuff Out wins it running away.

Jester: taking on the tough decisions, eh?

Apollo

 

[arhar]

I have just one point to add.

Compare these two scenarios:

Scenario #1:

Your Opponent: Swamp, Dark Ritual, Phyrexian Negator.

You: Island, Go.

Opponent: Rishadan Port, take 5, go, during your upkeep tap your Island.

You: Arrgh. Island. Go.

Opponent: Take 5, go.

You: Finally! Island, Snap.



Scenario #2:

Your Opponent: Swamp, Dark Ritual, Phyrexian Negator.

You: Island, Seal of Removal / Unsummon the Negator, go.





See the difference?

 

[Cateran Overlord]

Actually Jester, I'd use Incinerate over Bolt, but still:
Let's look at the black removal set:

Terror
Dark Banishing
Expunge
Snuff Out
Seal of Doom

Terror vs. Dark Banishing-Banishing is the winner here, the ability to target artifacts is sadly needed pretty often.

Terror vs. Expunge-Well DUke, I never need to cycle removal with the sole exception of another black deck. The 2 Mana cost is far more useful to me than the cycling.

Dark Banishing vs. Seal of Doom-Banishing again is the winner for me, as the element of surprise is far more needed for me. The seal is only useful really as a threat, I'd rather have them attack then lost their precious Masticore.

[/u]Snuff Out vs. Dark Banishing[/u]-This is a tie for me, I simply love them both. The 4 mana cost is irritating on Snuff, while DB requires a nice 3 mana Dark Ritual to cast.

In the end, I'd rank it as such:
1. Dark Banishing
2. Terror (6th foil rules)
3. Snuff Out
4. Expunge
5. Seal of Doom

These aren't all of the black removal spells, but that's all I feel like doing for now.

 

[DÛke]

...you can't possibly say that Terror is better than Expunge.
They are the 'exact' same cards, accept that Expunge cycles and cost one more mana than Terror. Hey, Cycling could come in handy on Expunge. What would you do with a Terror vs Black, pro Black, and "can't target" creatures? With Expunge, you could just simply Cycle it. Yes, it won't give you a better card, but a Terror sitting in your hand forever isn't great either.
Here's how my list would go:

1. Snuff Out - Hey, Black needs all the speed it could get. Paying 4 lives shouldn't be such a big deal if you are playing a speedy deck.
2. Expunge - This belongs at spot 2 rather than 4. Yes, it can't target Artifacts, but it Cycles.
2. Dark Banishing - This is not better than Snuff Out, so it's at 2 rather than 1. It and Expunge, I think, make up the basic creature elemination Black needs.
3. Terror - A non-Cycling Expunge. Oh well.
4. Seal of Doom - This could be the worst Seal, and the worst Black creature removal.

 

[Zadok001]

What about Vendetta????

 

[DÛke]

...Vendetta is not on the list because it's not a 'clone' card, just like Diabolic Edict. I don't know why it's not, but it just doesn't have the feel of a Dark Banishing or a Terror, it's something new.

If I have to compare Vedetta with Snuff Out, I'll take Snuff-Out.
Again, ACC is better than low cost, and you pay 4 lives, no matter how big the creature is. Vendetta vs Expunge is a tough one in my opinion. I'll leave it to someone who knows...

 

[Gizmo]

I think it`s wrong to say one of the cards is necessarily better than the other as they all interact with your deck and your opponent`s deck in different ways. Rather than deciding which is best you have to decide which of the cards have the traits you are currently looking for.

Snuff Out
Is good against expensive decks of fat monsters as then it`s casting cost is largely irrelevent. However if you are actually going to pay B3 for it then you might as well use a Banishing so that argument carries little weight. The real strength of Snuff Out is it`s ability to accelerate your tempo by playing two spells on one turn. If your deck is a Black control deck with heavy land destruction then you probably expect to be tapping out for the first 4 turns at least:
1. Duress
2. Port
3. Rain of Tears
4. Befoul
In this time a fast deck could have killed you stone dead with a Rancored Dogs and a backup spell. The Snuff out allows you to pursue two proactive strategies at once - if your deck is tapping out then Snuff Out is a good choice.
Although you lose 4 life by using the ACC you save 16 by killing a Dogs on the first turn rather than the fifth.

Vendetta
Is similar enough to Snuff Out to be considered a clone card IMHO. Vendetta is cheap, but not free. It really is best if you expect to spend the first few turns killing creatures, but obviously becomes far worse against fatty green decks. Vendetta`s strength is being versatile cheap removal that doesn`t cost you 4 life to kill a Ramosian Sergeant before it can start to thaw monsters out. It`s weakness is that it hurts to use it on a Winding Wurm, and it slows down your other spells by a turn, unlike Snuff Out.

Terror
The classic card is currently the weakest, why?
One word: Masticore.
When UBC rotates out of T2 then Terror is quite likely going to take a huge hike in popularity as there will likely be no artifact creatures of any note left to kill. For now Masticore renders it the worst possible option, IMHO

Expunge
As bad as Terror right now? No, at least you can get rid of it. But I hate Cycling - why play a card you don`t want anyway? Okay, so that`s a facetious argument but my basic point stands - that few Cycling spells are actually worth using because if you don`t want it then you don`t play it in the first place. But when Terror becomes good does Expunge leap to the head of the list?
Well, no, because casting cost is of key importance and Expunge costs 3cc (getting in the way of Stupor, Coercion, Tangle Wire, Rain Of Tears etc) whilst Terror is 2cc, and the only good 2cc card for Black is Rishadan Port. You also have to consider the decks you will be using it against - are they fast? If so then Terror will likely be worth using over the expensive Expunge. And how likely are you to meet a deck where you can usefully cycle Expunge? How often will you meet a black deck that you would normally lose against, but will have the spare mana to cycle Expunge and that cycling Expunge will mean you win - I would guess that not very often will the cycling make enough of a difference to turn the game.
It`s nice, don`t get me wrong, but there are strong downsides to Expunge over Terror that it wold be wrong to ignore. Expunge is not simply Terror+, there are negative aspects too.

Dark Banishing
Not actually T2 legal right now, BTW.
Banishing occupies an interesting middle ground. It doesn`t hurt like Vendetta or Snuff, it`s more useful than Expunge or Terror, but you`ve got to hold it in hand when you face an army of Zombies. What`s it good at - destroying monsters in the midgame when you have plenty of mana spare to play removal spells. What`s it bad at - anything else. It`s expensive and it can be just as useless as Terror in some games. If your deck will be playing slowly (as I suspect most CPA members decks will be) then the Banishing is a solid choice, but even then I would still possibly take the Seal Of Doom instead.

Seal Of Doom
Seal Of Doom is a Dark Banishing and so carries all the traits of a Bansihing in terms of the deck it fits into, but with two corollaries. Firstly it is the only card here that isn`t an Instant - this is bad, everybody knows that. But just how bad is it? Black decks have a habit of being proactive (doing things on their turn) as their main strategies are creatures, discard, LD and reanimation effects. As such how often does a black deck leave mana availbale for Instant-speed spells? Not often at all (which is why U/B decks are naturally hard to make work), so the fact that it isn`t a Sorcery is largely irrelevent. Expect it isn`t, because you can do funky surprise 'in response' tricks when they cast Rancor, or animate Village, or Power up a Ghitu Encampment.
But you can do all that with a Seal Of Doom, it just doesn`t come as a surprise when you do. You see Seal Of Doom is a permanent, and this is both a weakness and a blessing. Playing with Seal Of Doom usually means using it as a Sorcery - you hold it in hand until you see something to kill, then play it and immediately kill the target monster. It`s rare to put it out in advance unless you`ve got a good reason for doing so, because it telegraphs your plans and also lets them Disenchant it if necessary. But it is also a blessing because against counterspell decks you can force your opponent to defend his creatures before he even casts them. If you cast a Seal Of Doom on the third turn he has to use a counterspell right there right then, or his first Magpie is dead meat. Against a Banishing he can wait until he has enough countermagic to protect the Magpie, but the Seal means you are in charge of when he has to defend it, not him. The Seal is also more efficient for the opposite reason that Snuff Out is - you can play it on the third turn, and then tap out on turn 4/5/6 and still have creature removal ready to go.

So you see, one isn`t better than another. It depends on what you want to kill, when you want to kill it, and what else you need to be doing at the time.

For your debate and my amusement -
When are these cards better than each other; Abolish, Seal Of Cleansing, Disenchant, Illumination, and Aura Of Silence? Discuss.

 

[DÛke]

...I think you are right.
There's another thing you forgot to mention; sure, it depends what you want to do, but what you 'can' do depends on the environment.
Seal of Doom is even bad against blue right now because 'even' if you play it first, and the opponent wouldn't counter it, what would you kill with it? A Morphling? How would anyone destory a Morphling with a Seal of Doom? You can't. A Masticore? Yes, so you are partially right.

The 3 Black decks, and I'm talking about T2 right now, Control, Bargain and Negator. These are the real big things; both, Control and Negator should use the Snuff Out over both Terror, Expunge, and even Dark Banishing. Snuff Out and Vendetta seem to fit it well. Control should use Snuff Out and either Expunge, Terror, or Seal of Doom. You see, Snuff Out is better in most Black decks, because it's Black's 'nature' to be fast.

About the 'clone' Disenchants, well, here:
Disenchant is for playing controlish White, or White/Blue control.
There isn't, anyway, any really fast enchantments that you should worry about, so the 1W casting cost isn't going to be the biggest hassal. Abolish, however, I see to fit it well in the current Rebel decks. Rebels, just like Black suicide and Negator, tend to need the mana, so, Abolish, would fit it great.

Seal of Cleansing is just like Seal of Doom, but this one is more effective. There aren't any Enchantement, or lessly, Artifacts, that can't be targeted. This should be played against Blue mostly, just like Seal of Doom, or, in decks that uses Enlightened Tutor.

Aura of Silence, in a sense, is just like Seal of Cleansing, but a big more effective, after siding out the 1WW casting cost.
Not only does it act like a Seal of Cleansing, but also makes it harder to play the spells themselves. This should be played against Blue, Black, and Red. It could really destory the heck out of them. If they don't bother to cast the cards, than you just made an advantage, if they do cast the cards, then, they have wasted their mana, and a card. Aura of Silence is the most perfect removal I've seen.

 

[Purple_jester]

Gizmo is correct in assessing that the true best card for a deck is the one it interacts with best. While most black decks are speedy, some aren't. Others don't necessarily use hordes of creatures, while most do. It's a matter of deciding priorities.

My black decks usually have 50% 2cc creatures and spells, so Dark Banishing is the perfect card for me, as it doesn't make me lose life. The cards I use slow weenies down most of the time without any effort, so I don't have to worry too much about being speeded. I have a variant, though, with 4 each of Drain Life, where I use 4 Snuff Outs.

I have a minor phobia against Expunge or Terror because of a few select cards, namely Masticore, Rackling and Juggernaut.

The one thing I will disagree on heavily is Seal of Doom. Most decks find it bad to play that seal. The name of the game is surprise in most cases, which is why the cheap spells like Vendetta and Snuff Out are being used. Seal of Doom has no surprise, and it can normally be worked around. Green players will play the less deadly, but nontheless very dangerous creatures, first. White players (and green, actually) will destroy your Seal. Red will laugh at your Seal because it's creatures are so balanced that the loss of one will mean nothing.

I DO find myself playing the Seal like a sorcery (using it that same turn), which defeats the purpose of the enchantment. If I was going to play a sorcery slayer spell, then I would just use Befoul.

Do you know the solution of most black decks? They play with 2 kinds of slayers. Today's environments normally see both Vendetta and Snuff-Out. In my case, I see both Dark Banishing and Snuff-Out (such as in my own deck). Most black decks also have 8 slayers total (normally 4 each of 2 kinds). The principle of this is that most decks will only play about 8 choice/key creatures.

You'll find that a lot of black players have much to say about their choice of slayers, so my opinion and yours are entirely relative. To see the diversity, take a look at the casual Voting Booth, and look for the thread "For all you dedicated black players out there". That thread takes a look at the prefered slayers of black players. I found the results of that survey very interesting.

 

[Cateran Overlord]

The 1 cc difference is why I'd prefer Terror. I'm not saying that they are better, I'm just saying that I'd rather have a Terror usually. Reason: it doesn't take a whole Ritual to cast. I'd rather Terror and Duress than Expunge. I can't think of a single time Terror has been useless. Re: I usually play a Lens (Distorting, Thran, etc.) maindeck somewhere (due to my love of Fear creatures). Terror is always a weapon in some form, and I don't think Cycling justifies the one cc extra.

(Yes, I know DB isn't T2 legal, but I don't care, it's still cool)

As for the Disenchant series, I don't play white (or blue for that matter). Therefore, anything I said would be at best an educated guess. Just for the hell of it, I'll say Seal. Re: same as DUke's in this case. Disenchant doesn't need surprise really.

Next topic: the Giant Growth series.

 

[DÛke]

...Giant Growth versus Seal of Strength versus Inviograte versus Wild Might.

Giant Growth vs Seal of Strength - Giant Growth is just simply better than the Seal. The seal isn't that good; it has no surprise value, and Green doesn't need to save on mana in the first place, so the Growth out run the Seal.

Giant Growth vs Inviograte - This should be a hard one. I don't know which one to choose. Against Red, I would pick Inviograte for sure, but against all other colors, I don't know, I'll leave it to the Green experts.

Giant Growth vs Wild Might - Wild Might for sure. It costs 2, and it's rhystic ability costs 2 also. Wild Might, in my opinion is much better than Giant Growth. The opponent could save 2 mana each turn, but that means they are slowing themselves down. I'm not very sure about this choice, but, just by looking, Wild Might looks a lot better than Giant Growth.

Wild Might vs Seal of Strength - See above.

Wild Might vs Inviograte - I need a Green expert to answer this.

Inviograte vs Seal of Strength - Most likey Seal of Strength, again, I need the aid of an expert.

Come on people, I want to know....

 

[Duel]

Alright, pumps it is:

1: giant growth.
2: Wild might
3: Seal of strength
4: invigorate

Why?
Giant growth: Well, green stompy rarely gets alot of mana, so conservation of cost is a key factor. There's just nothing like +3/+3 for 1 mana. Well then, why isn't seal next? Patience.

Wild might: One of the most common plays is tapping out against green stompy. They try and empty their hand quick. This takes huge advantage of this. My brother, after I dealt him 8 damage on turn two with this, put four in his deck. Drawback? It won't keep working. People will get smart and start leaving the mana open.

Seal of Strength: the problem with this that giant growth doesn't have is surprise value. With this out, your opponent can plan his move. He knows that if you want to you can use it, and works accordingly. It's still +3/+3 for 1 green, but it's easier to destroy, and it's not as aggresive.

Invigorate: I only use this card in multiplayer. in green stompy, you don't want to waste space on a card that, if used ideally (i.e. your creatures isn't blocked) deals a pitiful one more damage. the only reson it's there at all is trample creatures, which can give your opponent a nasty surprise. When your pygmy razorback kills his laccolith warrior and runs over to him, this card works.

 

[Gizmo]

I think this isn`t a great analogy as they all do different boost effects for different costs.

 

[DÛke]

Yes, sure they are different, but that's the whole thing, which one's to use? Duel explained it well.

How about Rewind, Thwart, and Foil?

From all these three, I would for sure play Thwart.
I feel really safe when playing Thwart, I could tap out whenever I could, not worried about my opponent's next big thing.

Rewind would be close next. Just like Thwart, Rewind is good, but not really free, since if you wanted to play a Morphling on your turn, you wouldn't be able to use this. Rewind is good with multiple counters, maybe in DrawGo decks, where counter magic is everything.

Foil. I don't think I ever use this. Discard a land, a blue card, and Foil itself to counter 1 spell isn't very impressive. Sure, it could stop some threats, but you have just lost 3 cards, that's a threat by itself. Foil is good in DrawGo decks too, where you could draw a lot of cards.

 

[Purple_jester]

The 4cc counterspells are a delicate matter for blue mages. I've played all three of those, in a variety of deck types in combination with a lot of cards, and here's my honest evaluation.

Foil - Highly overrated. The cost of 3 cards to 1 is unbelievable, and hurts blue too much, too often. Often, that discarded blue card is another form of control, such as a bounce spell or counter. While this is acceptable in some cases (which is what makes Force of Will such an excellent card), the loss of an island, in a color that is already slow compared to the others, is a little too much. The ACC can't even be played in the first few turns unless your initial draw included 3-4 islands, allowing you the dangerous luxury of pitching one. One is often forced to include it in an all-blue or mostly blue deck in combination with return-islands-to-hand ACC counters.

Rewind - The fact that you get back your islands is highly advantageous in the mid-game, where blue control will almost always have more than 1 counterspell in hand. However, the 4cc slows blue's advancement considerably in the midgame. By the lategame, the effect of untapping islands is almost negligible. This is best used in speed-rush blue skies decks, where all or most of your creatures cost 1, 2 or 3 mana. This spell is perfect, allowing you to rush your creature or on-board control production for the first 2 or 3 turns, then maintaining that control for the next few turns, giving you a crucial advantage.

Thwart - This spell has a much more viable ACC than Foil, though again, it is impossible to implement in the early game. While conceivably you can use this spell as early as the third land drop, doing so at that early stage will often cripple a blue player, as she struggles to catch up with mana production. I would say that this spell is a little more versatile than even Rewind. You can similarly use this in speedy blue decks, but can also use it in mana-lock decks like Rising Waters, and Turbo-Stasis. (This is a wonderful card for Turbo-Stasis!) The greatest weakness of this spell is the requirement for 3 islands, meaning you have to play mostly blue unless you're using duals.

Overall evaluation - Thwart is the best of these three, and sees play in more decks because of the ACC. It is unfortunate that for the most part it cannot be played in multi-color. When Invasion comes out wit its multi-color emphasis, who's to say that each of these three counterspells will not fall by the wayside to gold counterspells with other advantages?

Whew! That was a long post. How about doing another one on the many alternate red X-burn spells?

 

[Duel]

first, 4cc counters

Thwart: tops the list. Surprise value at a small setback, unless this is played early in the game. Personally, I use all of these sparingly

Rewind: Well, at least it's free. You can counter another spell.

Foil: Like he said, 3 for 1. It's fine, if you need it, though.


now, for X burn spells

1 Rolling thunder: Works like fireball, only after target two, no extra mana needed. Only problem: questionable in decks that have mana problems.

2 Fireball: Versatile, cheap, effective. All-around good.

3 kaervak's torch: Causes counterpell to think twice, occasionally

4 disintagrate: It's cheap, and it takes out regenerators

5 Latulla: Effective, though easy to destroy.

6 Cinder elemental: a one-use latulla.

7 Blaze: no comment. Really. no comment.