I like running cancel. I run this over mana leak because late game mana leak is a dead draw. This is never a dead draw and can be used vs anything. We get that its strickly worse then counterspell, people can count to 3 ya know? But its still a good card. Not because allot of things are better, but because its a hard counter and can stop nearly anything your opponent throws at you. No matter what the situation, 3 mana open u can deal with it. Plus i think cancel has more flavor then counterspell and way beter art.
Posted By:
TheWrathofShane
(9/5/2011 4:29:15 AM)
Not as good as Mana Leak, usually better than Negate. Almost always worse than Dissipate.
The card is growing on me, I'll admit, but I don't find myself playing it.
Posted By:
Kryptnyt
(11/6/2011 9:21:47 PM)
I guess it's better than Counterspell if your opponent has a Spell Snare.
Posted By:
Lord_Seth_02
(2/21/2012 8:20:31 PM)
The difference between {1}{U}{U} and {U}{U}, for those who are asking, is actually quite big.
The difference between 1 mana.. is 1 turn. 1 turn you have to wait to stop a spell from coming out. 1 turn you have to wait to stop the flow of your opponents cards.
And speaking of flow, 1 mana ruins your flow as well. 2 mana can be played with 2 cards to counter 2 spells for a total of 4 mana spent. Now there is a 1 mana difference between those, and although it is a 2 card difference in your hand, it is also a 2 card difference in your opponents hand. One more turn where nothing has happened. Something control craves and aggro/combo can't stand.
Going simply by counterspell, the difference in the mana weight would be massive. Counterspell would require 4 blue to this cards 2. But counterspell isnt really used in any format right now due to lack of legality/ being beat out by far better cards (mana drain). Though, with mana leak, now its just 1 generic mana more and no tem... (see all)
Posted By:
Wisdomseyes
(4/6/2012 9:19:22 PM)
In a few years, one of two things will have happened:
1. Wizards gives in and brings back cheap counters, making this look foolish.
2. Wizards continues to print interesting counters that make this seem fairly costed. It would be relatable to the relationship between Demonic Tutor and Diabolic Tutor; "Yes, Counterspell was great because it was so cheap, but the current incarnation of the game doesn't need counters that are that cheap."
The way I see it, either direction seems reasonable. We have cheap counters with drawback like Mana Leak, as well as expensive but interesting counters such as Counterlash.
The point I'm trying to make is, both Counterspell and this are stepping stones. Counterspell was too high above the curve, and this is too low. The ultimate result will be a well-costed counter that fits evenly into the game.
Posted By:
Totema
(4/18/2012 3:19:53 PM)
The strange thing is...my opponent seems to get just as mad when I CANCEL his/her spells than when I COUNTERSPELL them. Its a hard counter, so even with way better cards like DISSIPATE out there, it doesn't change the fact that their spell gets countered and they get mad and I win.
Posted By:
face-fister
(4/26/2012 6:37:56 PM)
Cancel is an unacceptable replacement for Counterspell - which in the current standard environment is NOT AT ALL overpowered.
Reverberate, Silence, & Autumn's Veil are are recent & DIRECT answers to blue control, none of which have any drawback, and all cost 2 or less.
Why is blue being punished for being awesome :(
@Fictionarious seen Visions of Beyond? Recall's back...
@luca_barelli People said the same thing about Lightning Bolt, and like I pointed out, there are answers in every color (excluding black) in standard. I fail to see how it isn't balanced.
Posted By:
blugrn1989
(7/11/2011 4:21:44 AM)
reprint counterspell already!!
Posted By:
modestmouse_55
(7/17/2011 6:23:33 PM)