LackeyCCG

LackeyCCG Forum => CCG Design Forum => Topic started by: Tokimo on November 12, 2009, 08:34:34 AM

Title: Counterspells?
Post by: Tokimo on November 12, 2009, 08:34:34 AM
They're annoying, they require a stack to resolve (which IMO does the correct thing for counter spells but the wrong thing for lightning bolt). Most games of magic I play have no counter spells cast in them, the games which I play that have counter spells cast against me are usually unfun.

I'm curious about people's thoughts on counters in other games besides magic. Of course, if you have thoughts on counters in magic that'd be interesting as well.
Title: Re: Counterspells?
Post by: Trevor on November 12, 2009, 09:21:09 AM
Counterspells feel pretty much the same in any game. In wow, for example, they work exactly the same.

People don't like counterspells played against them really because it hurts them in the game. Really, it's pretty much the same as anything else that negates your things, like Terrors or Lightning Bolts. What people don't like is repeated counterspells back-to-back. The same goes for anything else that hurts you that goes back-to-back.

Counterspells, like any card of negation, must be well balanced and must cost accordingly.

Here are examples of counterspell cards that aren't likely to repeatedly lock an opponent out:

Counter target noncreature spell.

Counter target spell. As an additional cost, discard a card.

Counter target spell if its not the first spell played this turn.

Counter target spell and you lose 3 life.

Counter target spell. Skip your next untap step.

Counter target spell with a cost of 3 or less.

Counter target spell with an odd converted mana cost.
Title: Re: Counterspells?
Post by: Tokimo on November 12, 2009, 10:31:08 AM
Interesting.

Lightning bolts have never really bothered me. "Aw man, you smoked by muscle sliver and then punked half my team because I wasn't ready". I've always found that to be kinda amusing. I've never played a deck that chained burn spells on my creatures though.

I now remember playing against a diabolic edict deck. That was unfun too. Not because I lost, but because I couldn't keep any creatures in play long enough to attack more than once at best (including my poor crystalline sliver falling prey to the diabolic edict). And I imagine if I pulled out my white deck against a deck full of naturalize and kin and not much else I'd not have much fun.
Title: Re: Counterspells?
Post by: Trevor on November 12, 2009, 10:44:26 AM
Playing against Braids, Cabal Minion or any land destruction deck is worse than a counterspell deck. At least against a counterspell deck there is always that hope when you cast a spell that they will finally have run out of them.

Again, the issue is repeated annoyances. Its a good fix to have things not easily repeated, or not completely lock you out and at least you do something.
Title: Re: Counterspells?
Post by: Cyrus on November 12, 2009, 03:52:03 PM
I do sort of prefer games without "hard" counterspells. Anything that just straight up cancels anything else. As much as I enjoy playing lock down/counter/control decks in magic, I realize they are not much fun to play against unless you really know what you are doing. They almost seem impossible to beat, actually, I remember thinking that when I first started playing.

I prefer games with really targeted type counters, that counter 5 or so different specific cards. Its obviously for a different type of game, but if you have a sideboard or if you just know certain cards are really big in your area, then you include some of those and they are really devastating. They don't seem like they would be, they are just a really specific counterspell, but in a game where there is no one-answer counter card, they are really powerful when they work out.
Title: Re: Counterspells?
Post by: Alastair on November 12, 2009, 04:59:55 PM
Quote from: Cyrus on November 12, 2009, 03:52:03 PMI prefer games with really targeted type counters, that counter 5 or so different specific cards.

At present this is one of the biggest problems with the Doctor Who CCG. The game only has a single win condition (you must complete a goal and oppose a goal in addition to scoring 10 points). However 90% of the cards in the 3000 card game only work in relation to -specific- other cards. I spend an hour to build a super cool Dalek Timelord Killer deck and it's utterly useless if my opponent doesnt play a very specific batch of Timelords.

A good example would be one of the plot cards 'The Shakespeare Code'. In order for it to come into play both of the following condiitons must be met: #1 One player's William Shakespear at a Renaissance Spacetime card. #2 A different player's 3 Carrionites at the same Spacetime card. Utterly useless in the plot pool if my opponent isnt playing Shakespear or Carrionites.

Now on the subject of counterspells in magic, they have been a part of the game since Alpha. They are a valid tactic to use against your opponent. Sure, they might not be a whole lot of fun in a casual game for them to be played against you but if you're in a tournement or other competative setting there should be no complaints about a player using any valid means of winning they can.
Title: Re: Counterspells?
Post by: Trevor on November 12, 2009, 05:10:51 PM
Quote from: Cyrus on November 12, 2009, 03:52:03 PMI prefer games with really targeted type counters, that counter 5 or so different specific cards.
I think that is a terrible idea. You don't want to print cards that are useless most of the time. They become even more useless as more and more cards are printed.

In my opinion, cards which target other specific cards are only acceptable if they have other uses.

For example:

Choose one ? Destroy a card named Smurf or put 2 damage counters on target character.

If there is a card which is a core of the game, like the basic lands of magic, it is fine. Otherwise, you should try to design cards that can counter specific cards without referring to those cards by name. Anything else is bad design.

In an extremely rare case, its ok to make one card in your deck refer to another card in your deck. Like a creature card could say "Sacrifice this creature and 1 other creature to search your deck for a card named "Gargamel" and put that card in your hand. This type of card should be avoided if possible.

But you definately don't want to make cards in your deck specific to cards your opponent might have in their deck. That is bad design.

Consider the Magic card Rishadan Port that quickly dominated the standard format at the time. An answer was needed to this card's overuse so they printed Tsabo's Web in the next set. Tsabo's Web is still a pretty narrow card, but it is still useful against lots of other cards, such as Maze of Ith.
(http://gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?multiverseid=19767&type=card)
(http://gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?multiverseid=23228&type=card)
(http://gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?multiverseid=1824&type=card)
Title: Re: Counterspells?
Post by: Qunify on November 15, 2009, 02:51:59 AM
Yea, I hate it when I really get into a character and draw a card that makes my mouth water.  I get so excited, and stand up and cast my hand upon my enemy, throw the card down, and shout its name loudly... only to have him reply "Counterspell"

I hate it when that happens.
Title: Re: Counterspells?
Post by: Tokimo on November 15, 2009, 09:06:10 AM
Quote from: Qunify on November 15, 2009, 02:51:59 AM
Yea, I hate it when I really get into a character and draw a card that makes my mouth water.  I get so excited, and stand up and cast my hand upon my enemy, throw the card down, and shout its name loudly... only to have him reply "Counterspell"

I hate it when that happens.

I personally find reversals in game power to be amazing. It can be kinda boring when playing this card wins you the game all the time. If playing this card usually wins but you've had people do a reversal, it makes it more exciting next time you play the same card.

I also find playing a well placed reversal to be pretty exciting. I currently have a WGR Ally deck I've been playing and as an experiment I threw in a few utility spells, Lightning Bolt, Pacifism, and Naturalize. The deck has been absolutely amazing to play. I was playing a game where one player used a Hypergenisis to drop Thraximundar. The amount of fun I had dropping a pacifism on a big threat like that was massive. Meanwhile, I still didn't lock down my opponent entirely.

(http://gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?multiverseid=113533&type=card)
(http://gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?multiverseid=180595&type=card)
Title: Re: Counterspells?
Post by: Qunify on November 15, 2009, 12:07:32 PM
Quote from: Tokimo on November 15, 2009, 09:06:10 AM
I personally find reversals in game power to be amazing. It can be kinda boring when playing this card wins you the game all the time. If playing this card usually wins but you've had people do a reversal, it makes it more exciting next time you play the same card.

Reversals are great.  Buy Pacify is an enchantment played on your turn, not an instant that counters your card. I was referring to the instances in which you cannot play your card because of a counter. If I at least got to play it, and then someone destroyed it on their turn, I'm ok with that. :)
Title: Re: Counterspells?
Post by: Cyrus on November 15, 2009, 02:39:34 PM
Well their Sorcery allowed him to play the enchantment on their turn, but still.

off topic, but, if you want your deck to have some really great creature hold back power, I'd drop the pacifisms for Path to Exile, and maybe the Naturalize for Burst Lightning (move Naturalize to sideboard if you have one)
Title: Re: Counterspells?
Post by: Tokimo on November 15, 2009, 05:43:51 PM
The Naturalize is a lot of fun too though. I might swap the pacify out for path to exile though, that'll let me take care of painful creatures that are acting like enchants.
Title: Re: Counterspells?
Post by: Trevor on November 15, 2009, 08:00:49 PM
Quote from: Qunify on November 15, 2009, 12:07:32 PM
Quote from: Tokimo on November 15, 2009, 09:06:10 AM
I personally find reversals in game power to be amazing. It can be kinda boring when playing this card wins you the game all the time. If playing this card usually wins but you've had people do a reversal, it makes it more exciting next time you play the same card.

Reversals are great.  Buy Pacify is an enchantment played on your turn, not an instant that counters your card. I was referring to the instances in which you cannot play your card because of a counter. If I at least got to play it, and then someone destroyed it on their turn, I'm ok with that. :)
But conversely, counterspells can counter spells ONLY when they are cast. Pacifism can be used any time later on in the game.
Title: Re: Counterspells?
Post by: xchokeholdx on November 16, 2009, 03:50:08 AM
the problem with Counterspell is that is can counter almost all spells. This means the player holding the counterspell can wait the perfect moment to twart your plans. Esp. in Magic, where it is important to get a good Curve drop each turn, a good timed counterspell can win you the game right there.  :(

not my type of card.. not my type of game..
Title: Re: Counterspells?
Post by: Alastair on November 16, 2009, 03:38:34 PM
Quote from: xchokeholdx on November 16, 2009, 03:50:08 AM
the problem with Counterspell is that is can counter almost all spells. This means the player holding the counterspell can wait the perfect moment to twart your plans.

That is the purpose of the counterspells and other instants (and their versions that were once known as interrupts). If you can only do stuff during your turn, which includes countering spells and destroying enchantments and the like, then you might as well be playing a single player game.
Title: Re: Counterspells?
Post by: sneaselx on November 18, 2009, 04:10:15 PM
I personally love counter-type cards. They add excitement, and few things are funner than to carry out a massive chain combination, blocking each other's cards in crazy and creative ways. I actually tried a while ago to make a game made entirely to expand on the concept, but it failed for other reasons...
Title: Re: Counterspells?
Post by: SugimoriDesu on November 18, 2009, 10:11:27 PM
Counterspells can make a game fun, but it can also make a game really tedious. THere's been many a time where i've scooped because the other player was countering every last one of my cards.

There've also been games (primarily multiplayer) where there's been so many counters going off on all sides that we all laughed our asses off.
Title: Re: Counterspells?
Post by: Tokimo on November 18, 2009, 10:26:22 PM
I think this discussion has really helped me understand counter spells a lot better. ^_^

Here's to hoping counter spells are AWESOME in Mahoujo.
Title: Re: Counterspells?
Post by: xchokeholdx on November 19, 2009, 04:51:16 AM
Quote from: Tokimo on November 18, 2009, 10:26:22 PM
I think this discussion has really helped me understand counter spells a lot better. ^_^

Here's to hoping counter spells are AWESOME in Mahoujo.

If you think this over a bit, you?ll see why counterspells in YOUR game will be the reason why it will crash down like a rock.

Younger players tend to get VERY upset when you mess with their possibilities of playing a card. If they want to play a card, let them.

Counterspells are not the kind of card you would want in the game you are making....
Title: Re: Counterspells?
Post by: Tokimo on November 19, 2009, 09:57:20 AM
Good point. I guess I'm really going to need to pilot this with some kids.
Title: Re: Counterspells?
Post by: Trevor on November 19, 2009, 12:08:46 PM
Quote from: Souji Tendou on November 18, 2009, 10:11:27 PM
Counterspells can make a game fun, but it can also make a game really tedious. THere's been many a time where i've scooped because the other player was countering every last one of my cards.

There've also been games (primarily multiplayer) where there's been so many counters going off on all sides that we all laughed our asses off.
The same can be said of any negation card. I think Land Destruction decks are far more annoying to play against than counterspell decks. Counterspells are fine if they are properly designed. Try to not have them be easily repeatable, and if a deck can use counterspells, make sure it has weaknesses and have counterspells be one of its strengths.  This is similar in magic to having green get cheap big creatures and no counterspells, but blue has weak big creatures and counterspells. Blue has counterspells, but it doesn't have creature destruction.

No one likes playing a game where they are completely locked out, so you should design a counterspell that doesn't do that. 

Here's an example counterspell that could never completely lock a player out:

QuoteCounter target spell that costs 3 or less.

The existence of counterspells makes games a lot more combative. When your opponent might have one, every spell you play is unsure. This not knowing can be very exciting.
Title: Re: Counterspells?
Post by: Tokimo on November 22, 2009, 11:14:26 PM
Interestingly, today I played against a red white control deck. That was really not very fun. I mean, I lost sure, but the thing is how I lost. All my creatures got singed and I just sat there turn after turn hoping to draw creatures faster than he drew bolts and wraths.

Meanwhile, getting overwhelmed by combo and aggro decks I always find amusing (played against a player with a vampire deck where we played 3 close games, win-loss-win and all three of those were really fun, even the loss). Aggro decks are the most fun to play against because you interact a lot. Combo decks you interact very little, but you at least get to do 'stuff' until they hit their win scenario.
Title: Re: Counterspells?
Post by: SugimoriDesu on November 22, 2009, 11:53:27 PM
Most of the people i play against nowadays tend to use late-bloomer decks, with at least a window of 7 turns (on average) before the deck starts pumping out the good stuff. Now, remember, i'm a Multiplayer soul, so these decks normally don't run many Counters, and what counters do get used are usually whatever is good in Standard Constructed.

Counters in moderation can be fun, but that control situation Tokimo was talking about is most definitely the pits.
Title: Re: Counterspells?
Post by: Alastair on November 23, 2009, 12:01:24 AM
Again though (for me at least) it would depend if I was playing casual or tournement. If I'am in a tournement and loading down my deck with counters will help me win, I'll do it in a heartbeat. For casual games however I tend to stick to the moderation guideline.
Title: Re: Counterspells?
Post by: Tokimo on November 23, 2009, 12:04:33 AM
I'm kinda pondering how to help avoid excessive control. One idea that springs to mind is simply making a small selection of control cards in the core set and then not allowing too many to overlap.

As it stands for example there are ... 195 blue instant spells with the text "Counter" "target" and "spell" in them. This means it's possible (although silly) to build a deck with 20 islands and 40 counterspells in it. If instead Counterspell were the ONLY one, they'd end up as tactical surprises instead of chained aggravation. Similair effects with Naturalize and Doomblade (78 cards that have 'destroy' 'target' and 'creature' and are black instants).
Title: Re: Counterspells?
Post by: Alastair on November 23, 2009, 12:10:45 AM
Except you'd eliminate the primary purpose of blue, and that is to counter. I think you'd be better off offering a wider choice of control/counter and then letting the players decide what is "casual" to them. Some wont like it, of course...as is obvious by this thread :) But restricted a way of play simply because you dont like it isnt a good way to go about designing a game.
Title: Re: Counterspells?
Post by: Ripplez on December 03, 2009, 01:50:49 PM
hi. im not very experienced here but i hope i can add something to this thread.

counterspells are off-putting to some casual players and hard to counter because counterspells basically require a higher level of play and understanding of the game. this isnt to say your a bad player but beating counterspells usually require a 'level up' in terms of gameplay that some casual players dont take.

for example, here are some wellknown methods of beating a deck you know will negate your cards -

1) turn 1 or two is one of the first few turns where your opponent doesnt have enough mana to cast some of the strong counterspells. when counterspell was/is legal (i dont keep track anymore), you, 2 lands on the blue mages turn was enough to keep you off track. blue mages also had the counter bird (whose name i cant recall right now) but this meant that on the first turn, you could develop something if your deck was fast enough

2) play around the counterspell. this is a very hard concept but its rooted in the fact tat your opponent, if hes any good, will save his counters for cards that actually deserve it and will usually NOT counter every single thing you do but wait for your strong cards. by playing other side cards, your opponent has to guess whether or not they counter the card you just played or the card that you might play in the future. playing around these situations where you both know the threats available on both sides is a strategy that can help dampen the disadvantage

3) make the counterspell a bad option to play. if your opponent wishes to counter your spell on your turn, he needs mana available for it (which is why... force of will was it?... was so good. you could play it manaless). which means if you play a strong card on HIS turn, he will have to make a choice, counter it on his turn, using up his mana and leaving himself unable/disadvantaged to counter your spells on your next tap-free turn. meaning it becomes a bad situation for him : counter now or counter later, something is coming through

4) if your opponent has nothing but counterspells and none of these things work, especialy option 3, then your opponent will usualy not have alot of development. alot of the trickery here for a blue mage is to keep a presence that means something while actualy having enough mana to control your actions. if you just play as much as you can and if you get a lead, you might be able to keep it, blue mages do not have much in the way of stopping threats that ALREADY exist (an aspect of balancing that colour that is important)

counterspells ARE difficult and they can be extremely taxing. but there are some actions you can take here, they happen to not be contained in the cards but in your choices as a player. when you try and balance the stuff, try and remember that your players arent simply bots, theyr might not just go : pick best card here. pick best card here. pick best card here. they might have a gameplan that goes into their opponents heads or that revolves around an understanding of the game, advantage and choice. this is why new casual players usually dont understand that this isnt an end-all strategy, it requires a mental shift

keep in mind the target audience. some ppl (like me) will invariably play any tcg they come across so i might try and break your game :O but for the most part, try and understand how deep you want your game to go, playerwise as well as card- and fun-wise.

gl with your game :) sorry if i rambled without helping any
Title: Re: Counterspells?
Post by: Cyrus on December 03, 2009, 03:08:02 PM
I'm not going to quote all of that because its pretty large, but I'd like my post to just encourage players to read it again with a simple:

x2

You sound a lot like me, haha. Good run down on the early stages of playing magic and the bane that is counterspells at that time.
Title: Re: Counterspells?
Post by: Tokimo on December 03, 2009, 08:02:34 PM
I my experience so far, it seems that getting around counter spells actually take two things: Playing around them, and building a deck that can play around them. I feel I've been getting better with all the Magic I've been getting to play with Lackey, and I definitely am getting a sense of what decks tend to overpower control and what decks tend to flail around. Certainly audience is a big factor here, I want to design something that is a bit more 'casual friendly' than magic, but I'd prefer not to sacrifice the upper play levels (that might be hard to do  :-[)
Title: Re: Counterspells?
Post by: Revolved on December 04, 2009, 11:43:13 AM
I kinad like being countered actually  :D. It forces me to change my plans and come up with new tactis to try and win.
Happend with my Stuffydoll/Pacisfism deck (a rather imba combo in my opinion expecially when combined with Greater Auramancy, works great in FFA's ;D) they countered the dolls and then i nearly lost for lack of any other real way to kill in it(the deck that is). Without counter cards magic would probably end up just races to get your game winning combo out.
Title: Re: Counterspells?
Post by: Ripplez on December 04, 2009, 12:07:59 PM
you have other forms of slowing down the enemy - destruction, combat, control cards. without counters, you would still have ways to continue to influence the opponent
Title: Re: Counterspells?
Post by: Tokimo on December 04, 2009, 08:26:58 PM
I've realized that. I am trying to learn to play a control deck. I've got a Grixis control deck and it mainly focuses on killing critters (2 damage to everything spells while most of my critters are 3+ toughness) with a few counters thrown in. I realized that control doesn't mean counter spells once when I got rolled by a red & white control deck.