Arcane Denial is Better Than Counterspell

[@georgwerner1039]

Nice video! I had never thought of it that way. However, the conclusion is only valid if there are still all 4 players at the table which would be the case earlier in the game. As the game progresses and one player loses the game, leaving only 3 players on the table, the two spells would give the same result in terms of card advantage. Later in the game, when you are down to only one opponent, it would actually be the other way around. So there is one state of the game when they are even, and two when either would be 'better'. One thing that isn't taken into consideration here is the importance of a counterspell in the late game, when it can make the difference between winning and losing. Then, when you are left with only one opponent, the real counter spell would be 'better'. But then there's the difference in mana cost between the two spells, which would make arcane denial 'better'. I think one can't say either one fits better generally. It always depends on the state of the game I would say.

[@cybersnap6072]

Thanks for the comment! You make a valid point. The fewer opponents that you have, the worse denial gets and when you're down to 1v1, counterspell is definitely the better option. I agree I can't really say that one is ALWAYS better than the other. But I do think that denial will more frequently be the better option. This of course depends on your playgroup/meta and if people tend to pick each other off one by one or if one player tends to win all at once

[@zengamer321]

this is absolutely correct. there's another video by the trinket mage about this card and they got it entirely wrong. unfortunately it has a lot more traffic than this. people tend to absolutely suck at understanding the models that they are provided. when a new player learns magic, they are told what card advantage is. they usually don't think about what kind of concept is card advantage, how it was created, and how we know it works. if we never analyze it and then we try to take it and run with it and generalize to more than 1 opponent, we can trip up in our generalization and create a non functional form of "card advantage" that isn't very useful for multiplayer.

[@cybersnap6072]

Wow I feel seen lol. That trinket mage vid is actually what prompted me to make this. No disrespect to tm he's great at what he does but yeah I think he missed with that one in particular. Thanks for the comment!

[@ChibiRuah]

So just fun feedback from a rando. I generally think the argument is good, but i generally agreed going in to it. I say your voice was clear so that is good. I think it may be worth reformatting the slide or breaking it up. having to scroll down makes it feel a little more janky. maybe doing it the conclusion on another slide could help. Plan text is good but maybe having a few imagines to go along with it help add some extra punch to it. I will also say having player B being who we are feels a bit odd but doesnt make it hard to follow (that said i know the core idea). all that said i still think the video is affective on saying why the card is generally thought to be good.

[@cybersnap6072]

@@ChibiRuah Thank you for the thoughtful feedback! The notes on screen was definitely a last minute addition and I agree I could spice them up a bit. I’m glad to hear you could follow along despite the improvisational nature of it all. Have a good one

[@RadiganMonke]

Literally who cares, it's a card game for kids

[@cybersnap6072]

Thanks for the engagement friend. I hope you have hobbies that you do care about :)

[@RadiganMonke]

@@cybersnap6072 Keep Yourself Safe

[@MisterWebb]

Don’t you care about your kids? Don’t you want to play with your kids? Don’t you want your kids to play the best card game ever invented? That’s why I got into Magic at the ripe old age of 45 … I guess monks don’t have kids?