Casual Players Hating Blue(again)

[TheCasualOblivion]

I've come up with some more thoughts on the casual player's hatred of blue. First, some history:

I started playing during 4th Edition/Ice Age. Mono-Blue control didn't really exist back then. The game didn't have enough efficient counterspells and efficient card drawing then. There were generally 3 Blue decks. There was U/W control based on Counterspell/Wrath-Swords-Disenchant, as well as Fish and Big Blue, which were based on creatures backed up by countermagic. Blue didn't have nearly as bad a name back then, and I remember playing those three decks all of the time and never getting any lip over it.

With Tempest Block, we get Draw-Go and Forbiddian, and that's where all the hate really started. These were the Blue decks that would counter nearly every spell someone would cast, gain card advantage, and win. These are the decks that really started the blue hate, and are a big reason I find people having no idea how to play blue. At their worst, these decks can be brainless with the countering every spell no matter what it is, and is one of the reasons playing less counterspells and the art of deciding when NOT to counter something is largely a lost art. I blame these for the people I see countering a spell for the sake of countering it when they don't have 20-25 more counterspells in the deck.

Meanwhile, people tend to associate blue with those sort of decks, and playing other sorts of decks with counterspells, or even Islands prompts people to raise eyebrows and start making comments.

 

[DÛke]

The most counters I have ever included in a deck was 12. And at least 4 of them are usually conditional counters (i.e. Miscalculation, Mana Leak, Force Spike...)

The casual players I face through MTGO hate it when I counter just one of their spells, for good reasons, of course. Although I use few counters in my Standard casual decks, I know what to counter. So when I go inside their head, figure out their goals, and recieve all the vibes I need from the early turns, I pretty much sense when a counter is really needed. They get irritated when I Hinder just one of their good spells, after they've let loose 4 or 5 other spells that I dealt with through other creative means.

I have had so many players concede after accusing me of "sitting on counters" because of a single Mana Leak I had carefully cast. And, they have formed the habit of not believing anyone who tells them "hey, but I only have 6 counters in this deck!" As soon as a spell is countered, they think you have 30 counters in the deck, whether or not the format contains 30 counters or not.

 

[TheCasualOblivion]

Something we actually agree on.

I think the stupid 25-30 counterspell decks have traumatized people. People hate those decks so much that different decks that use the same tricks in a far lesser quantity get the same flack, undeservedly.

 

[Mikeymike]

Ahhh, the power of the counterspell.

 

[orgg]

The funny thing?

I've got a deck with 30 counterspells, a Charbelcher, and four of that Scourge rare that lets me search for seven cards to draw...

...and it's won mabe two or three games.

(at least ones that were played out to the end, or at least the midgame)

 

[Oversoul]

I think the stupid 25-30 counterspell decks have traumatized people.

Whatever. I think the Forbidian is actually quite a cool deck to play if you know what you're doing. Although that still only has like 20 actual counterspell-type cards. A 60-card deck running 30 and actually being good is not something I have seen...

 

[Mooseman]

Whatever. I think the Forbidian is actually quite a cool deck to play if you know what you're doing. Although that still only has like 20 actual counterspell-type cards. A 60-card deck running 30 and actually being good is not something I have seen...

I find that blue is one of the hardest colors for people to play. I requires you to play your opponent, not just the combo in your own deck. You have to know when to hold that force spike and when to blast away.....
I really like the Atog deck, but I have lost games with it, when I make the mistakes and my opponent takes advantage of it.

 

[Nightstalkers]

I run an old style counter deck myself... heh, I love pure counter decks when going up against jerks who think their deck is everything. It irks me to no end how pompous these people get when they build a deck, dominate the competition in an area with it, and keep playing it. Sure they keep winning tourneys, but where is the fun?!

I play my deck, kick them totally out of the competition, and usually end up being kicked out of the tourney because I'm using an "unfair advantage."


Blue = just a color, like black or green. If you want to complain about unfair advantage, start looking at these decks that win on turn 1.

 

[Mooseman]

. It irks me to no end how pompous these people get when they build a deck, dominate the competition in an area with it, and keep playing it. Sure they keep winning tourneys, but where is the fun?!

I play my deck, kick them totally out of the competition, and usually end up being kicked out of the tourney because I'm using an "unfair advantage."

Since I don't play in Tourneys, I could care less about those pompus people, but it is fun to see the frustration in other players faces as they try to overcome a good control deck. Although it is really cool to see a player make a run at your control deck through inovative and inspired play.

 

[Oversoul]

I see a lot of anti-blue control sentiments here, but I think it's the case that wherever you go, the decks that do well are highly disliked by some. When combo does well, players complain about the combo components being broken (sometimes they are) rather than trying to innovate and beat it. When prison does well, players acuse it of being boring with locks that are too fast to fight (sometimes that's the case). When aggro does well, people malign the cards that make it so speedy, relentless, and easy to play (aggro decks can be all of these). And of course, whenever control or aggro-control does well, which in many formats is all the time, there will be those who don't appreciate seeing their own weapons being rendered useless as an annoying creature swings away at them.

I guess blue control is quite an effective deck in most casual circles. It has been around for a long time, shows up everywhere, and receives possibly more complaints than any other archetype.

I'm not sure what the recent fuss about players making mistakes with blue is all about. Players will make mistakes with any deck. And then they either learn eventually or they don't. How is it any more significant when it happens with blue control?

 

[Gizmo]

I dont think most Forbiddian decks ever ran as many as 20 counterspells, as it's counterproductive. 12 was always enough countermagic to lock your opponent out, when supported by bounce, card drawing, mass removal, and control magic effects.

 

[Rooser]

Wow. For once I actually agree with Duke on every last point.

Blue is a skill-intensive color. Bad players lose to blue all the time because when good players weild it, it's good, but when they weild it, it's bad, so they feel like they can't join in the fun.

I also think the problem is that Heavy-counter mono-blue decks are easy and cheap enough to build to the point where they destroy just about anything a newbie with a low budget will happen to build, which means it's a popular deck option for the advanced-beginner who's looking to put the hurt on his friends. This results in nearly every player being traumatized by blue counterspell decks at some point in their career, usually piloted by the sort of people who like to gloat when they win, which in turn spawn the ridiculous reactions that Duke was talking about. They see one counter-spell, and they suddenly think there are thirty because they're jerk friend Tommy played with 30, and then they start willing themselves to lose, and then they call you names.

Once you understand that counterspells are more about stealing tempo than they are about saying no, (This is why Memory Lapse is actually a good card), you start to realize that

a) Counterspells can be played around

so therefore

b) Good decks don't hold more than 12 counterspells, (16, maybe, if they're pushing it)

and that getting angry at somebody for mana leaking your whatever is pretty dumb.

Of course, none of this is meant to offend train. His objection to the color is more philosophical, though from what I understand it also has more to do with the counterspell mechanic than it does with the entire color.

But, in my experience, casual players don't hate blue as a group, (I don't, and never really did). It's just the ones who haven't figured out how the counterspell mechanic really works strategically, ie. the newbies. Until they figure that out, they keep losing to it - and most people holda grudge agaisnt the things they don;t understand. Most players get over it eventually unless they have some hilarious gimmick-bias like train does.

 

[Gizmo]

Memory Lapse can be better than Counterspell.

 

[orgg]

I had a half-hour argument about that last night Gizmo.

Some people just don't have any idea of what "tempo" is. Nor what three Memory Lapses in a row can do to someone else's.

Hell, I probably don't have a perfect understanding of Tempo, but I know it when I see it... I think.

 

[DÛke]

And that's why Hinder is the most complex counter magic in recent history, if not in all history of Magic. Seconded only by Time Stop (which I feel hesitant to include in the counter magic category), it can do everything a Blue player would want from a simple counter magic spell that only costs 1UU.

 

[TheCasualOblivion]

Mana Drain might give Hinder a run for its money, it definitely is a lot more than just a counterspell.

Other than that, I like Hinder, I think its my favorite mono-blue 3cc Counterspell.

 

[Ferret]

When it comes to counters (on the rare occasion I play Blue) I prefer Memory Lapse. Not only does it counter the spell, but it ties up the player's next turn to be a repeat of the last one (more-or-less). If you're holding another counter you can continue to slow them down. If not, you know that the spell's on its way and you can prepare for it.

-Ferret

"When in doubt, INSIST!"

 

[TheCasualOblivion]

As far as Memory Lapse goes, its good for what it is. I don't like to think of it as a counterspell. Its best for casting on unimportant/less important spells for the purpose of wrecking your opponent's next turn. On the other hand, if your opponent plays something that must never enter play, you really want the real thing, to kill it for good. Its just a question of what you need. Stalling the tempo/game for a turn, or the removal of a threat. Memory Lapse does one, Counterspell does the other. The beauty of Hinder is that it can do either.

 

[Gizmo]

What I like from Memory Lapse is that its one of few 2cc counters that actually definately stops the spell. There's a lot that stop if they dont pat 2, or 3, or X... but after Counterspell (and Mana Drain) only a couple can let you tap down to 2 mana and guarantee a counter for their next spell. And as has already been said, it's great strength is that it clogs up your opponent's next draw.

Say you've got enough to win soon and your opponent needs a Wrath in his next card. If he plays a Fact Or Fiction to draw that Wrath and you Counterspell it, then he can draw the Wrath in his draw phase and win with it. If he plays the Fact and you Memory Lapse it then he's going to draw the FoF and not have the mana to Wrath even if he gets one from the FoF. There's a whole host of similar situations.

Still only 5% as annoying as a Plow Under though. Who the **** thought of putting Plows, Eternal Witnesses, and Crystal Shard in the same format?

 

[DÛke]

Gizmo:

Who the **** thought of putting Plows, Eternal Witnesses, and Crystal Shard in the same format?

Amen.