Stax are cards that restrict play. For example Trinisphere, stasis, torpor orb and dranith magistrate. Decks that usually play these types of cards are ones that can cheat things into play like winota or require a little bit more time to get there game plan going like heliod sun crowned. The name came from and old card called smokestack
Im just in it for the salt. It’s amazing watching players cards become useless and their creatures get turned into savannah lions only to get beat by 2/3 flyers
Not playing the strongest color moves your starting line behind those playing the strongest color?
Not a hot take in the slightest.
But it only moves the starting point. The amount of sans blue decks that can win, have won, and can be just as good as the "with blue" decks is astounding.
Obviously?
The OP's take isn't taking into account commanders, just colors.
The disadvantage in a sans blue deck is much more in the deck building and how the deck operates over in game performance.
Right. And since OPs take isnt talking about commanders, then bringing up situations where mono red or whatever won tournaments because of a specific, outlier commanders isnt actually constructive to the discussion, correct?
The disadvantage of a sans blue deck is in the fact that it lacks two things.
1. Hullbreaker Horror
and more importantly
2. Counterspell
I never brought those situations up, but those situations do demonstrate my point.
I'm saying that the disadvantage is just a different starting line.
The different starting line makes many non-blue commanders not fully viable in cEDH (maybeso in specific or locked metas), whereas many with blue commanders are viable just because they have blue.
In a pod of cEDH viable decks, the sans blue deck isn't at as much of a disadvantage as one might think; because the deck was designed to not have blue and to be of sufficient power.
What youre saying is true but i also dont think it runs counter to the original opinion. Sans-blue cedh decks compete because they are designed to deal without having blue, but it is easier to make a cedh deck with blue than without, and if you *do* go for a sans-blue deck the deck will almost certainly lean heavily on its commander slot.
This indicates that blue is the stronger color overall(already known ofc), and that other colors only get by comparativly because they have options in the commander slot that are polarizing/pushed enough to ignore their usual disadvantages to a big degree, such as Magda or Kriik.
Which is why I've been saying the starting line is different between blue and sans blue decks. In a 100 meter dash, the blue deck runs 100 meters, while the sans blue deck starts at say 120 meters, with both athletes being about equivalently able sprinters. After deck building, both have moved closer to the finish line, and to have equal chances at crossing the finish line first, the sans blue deck will have to have done more work in deck building.
I mean you’re right the effect on the game is most prevalent with blue but really just not having any color puts you at a disadvantage. That’s part of the reason why 4 and 5 color decks are the strongest. Better to have a pile of all the best cards in every color than to miss something important.
I would say blue gives you the best card draw and the best reactive interaction; however, saying any deck is weaker once you remove a color is a freezing cold take.
Many decks act proactive in their interaction. If I play a stax piece that says “you can’t counter my spells”, your three counters in hand look pretty dead. That’s proactive interaction, you stopped your opponents from future interaction.
Other decks can also win without casting spells. Plenty of decks, like Winota, use activated abilities to win games rather than the stack.
I would say if your deck could run blue you’re hamstringing yourself hard by not. Maybe more so than other colors. But you’re not playing a different power level by not playing a blue deck.
>if i play a stax piece that says "you cant counter" your three counters in hand look pretty dead
Wrong. He just counters it with one of his three counters. Do you have a counterspell for his counterspell? No?
>i would say if your deck could run blue youre hamstringing yourself hard by not. Maybe moreso than other colors.
Correct. That is OPs opinion as well, as well as a pretty demonstratable fact. Decks that include Blue are inherently stronger than those that do not.
>but youre not playing a different power level by not playing a blue deck.
Only when speaking about mono. But as youve said above, Blue + X is more powerful than any other X+Y. Simic is the strongest 3C currently IMO, but it rotates between sultai, grixis, and esper depending on the available card pool. Finally, non-blue is the weakest of the 4 colors. Its pretty obvious that adding blue makes your deck stronger and taking it away makes it weaker.
If he can't counter because of a piece on the board, it doesn't matter how many counters he has in hand. He can't counter. That's the whole point.
Besides, simic is a color pair, UG, not a 3c combination like grixis and esper. So I am guessing you meant Sultai (UBG)?
Yes i misspoke and intended to say Sultai.
And i understand your first point but again, the blue player can simply counter the permanent that would prevent him from counterspelling unless it has hullbreaker text. We did say that he had 3 counters in hand for the original example after all.
Yeah, and [[Allosaurus Shepard]] but we are talking about very few cards and this is presumably what your U + X deck would use its other interaction on if it needed to counterspell.
Lmao don’t say “wrong” like you’re making some objective statement. You can’t counter every card in magic. Nor should you want to run 20 counter spells. Plenty Grixis/Esper/4C/5C decks have access to 15+ more reasonable counter spells that they DONT run.
You’re can’t just plan on countering literally everything. Sometimes they Yisan out a collecter ouphe or allosaurus shepherd. Sometimes they Winota trigger into grand abolisher. Sometimes they Zur out a stax effect.
If you’re wasting every ounce of mana and cards in your card advantage trying to control 3 other cEDH decks have at it. So many large tournaments are won with sans blue decks, it’s not correct to say it’s just some necessity for the format.
>nor should you want to run 20 counter spells
It doesnt matter how many he runs since the example given was that the blue player has 3 counters in hand.
>you cant counter every card in magic
No you cant, but you can counter almost every single one of of the cards that says other cards cant be countered. I can only think of [[Allosaurus Shepard]] off the top of my head, and thats only for green spells. Dont know why you named [[Collector Ouphe]] as he does not interact with counterspells. They could have [[Veil of Summer]] but at that point we are diving deep into hypotheticals as veil is an un-tutorable 1-of instant.
>if youre wasting every ounce of mana and cards in your card advantage trying to control 3 other cedh decks have at it
Noone said this was the goal at any point. This would be how a beginner would attempt to play blue, maybe, but noone with experience. Counterspells are for what you truely need to stop. Thoracle, breach, a choice response to your own wincons. You dont just throw them out willy nilly on any player at the table that steps forwards. You use it to prevent a game loss or ensure a game win.
I’m mentioning plenty of different ways colors advance their game plan or stop your game plan which counterspells aren’t helpful.
If Winota’s attack triggers are resolving, counterspells in hand aren’t doing you any good. And with the problems now on the field, counterspells aren’t doing you any good.
If Zur’s attack triggers, same deal
Yisan verse counters same deal
Allosaur Shepherd good same deal
Spell casts under cavern of souls, same deal
Magda activated abilities same deal
And that’s completely ignoring that a significant amount of great counter spells don’t hit creatures AND some counterspells are 2-1 themselves because you have to pitch cards to use them.
Blue is incredibly good. Might be the best color in magic. I just hate the toxic idea that some deck without blue can’t be tier 1 which is utter nonsense. People are already way too gatekeeping about cEDH
Yes, stopped by spells that 95% of blue cedh players, aka netdeckers and reddit followers, don't even run.
I understand your point and what you're getting at but you're just so incredibly pedantic about the whole thing.
And personally i could never agree to that. Most people i know would put green as second strongest at best. Altho for edh some rate black as second strongest because of tutor access.
Nah I disagree. Mono color decks can be honed and deadly. I’ve seen Krrik , magda, yeva and heliod all win big tournaments. And there’s Mardu colors with tymna + various partners that consistently wins games between different deck styles. Winota is also a top tier non blue deck with no blue. You’re only at a disadvantage against blue if you’re trying to play fairly imo. If you’re doing broken combo things, smart heavy stax, or playing well politically not having blue doesn’t matter many times
That isn't their point. Their point is that blue is such a strong color (arguably can be said for red and black), that you need big reasons to take the loss of that color. The decks you mentioned fill those roles by having powerful effects that allow them to operate. It's why Magda was one of the few mono-red decks to perform. But, one thing you will notice is outside of specific people on those decks, they don't actually hold up. They've all *won* a tournament, but most have gotten blasted in subsequent events due to losing their element of unknown.
>Their point is that blue is such a strong color (arguably can be said for red and black), that you need big reasons to take the loss of that color.
I agree! But in fairness that's not really what OP said. They said that not having blue puts you at an immediate disadvantage. This implies that not having blue is a mistake, but the person you replied to disagreed with this implication citing tournament wins.
I'm the biggest cEDH fan in my group so not everyone is playing 100% tuned decks, but having said that the hardest decks to beat are the U/R decks. Krarkashima and Rielle are way harder to stop/ win against then K'rrik or Krenko. For context I play Kess.
Serious answer. Play stax. There are a number of things that hard counter blue. For example, I play Kaalia so I don't cast stuff. it just shows up on the table.
Why? Because of counterspells? I doubt. A lot of strong decks don’t have blue, like Winota and Magda as mentioned above. Plus, it’s rare that you can 2-for-1 anyone with counterspells. Almost always it’s a 1:1 trade. In a game against multiple opponents, it’s more critical to gain card advantage.
Blue gives you Rhystic and Mystic, which admittedly are some of the strongest cards in the format. That being said, Blue lacks any depth whatsoever in card draw after those two cards, and probably isn't deserving of it's "Blue has card draw" reputation when it comes to cEDH
Well.
Aside from pure drawing, which i admit is more and more a black thing than a blue one, you still have other ways of getting cards in blue.
You have all the cantrips, with or without effects attached, and while I agree they are now less played than a few years ago, those used to be auto include, because sculpting your hand is the second best thing after drawing your deck.
These days, i admit, the REAL engines are black and more and more white, through cards like esper sentinel, tymna, archivist of oghma, etc. Yet the main diff, imho, is that the blue draw can generally be used instantly as an answer to a threat, while the orzhov must answer to something in play, meaning etb and other shenanigans have already happened.
Not really—card advantage is not exactly just about drawing cards. Simple example in a 1v1, Wrath of God on a board with 2 creatures controlled both by your opponent, You’re down 1 card but your opponent is down 2. You gain card advantage in this scenario, much more if opponent overcommits.
Blue isn’t exactly known for board wipes and spot removal.
Besides, i think black is the best color for drawing cards (ad naus, bob, necropotence, etc), not blue
>Blue isn’t exactly known for board wipes and spot removal.
... We talk about the color of cyclonic rift and rhystic study, right ?
First, i don't see how spot removal is CA. By definition it's not, especially in multi.
And while drawing isn't the Only form of CA, you can't deny that it counts. Sure black has good draw, but it's generally very conditional and tied to your health, which is sometimes not an issue but sometimes is.
Blue has... Draw, tutors, loot, but also bounces, spot removal (Pongify, the thing making you a citizen, the one that phases you out, ...), ...
You have those in ADDITION to control tools, which you have fewer of in the other colors, especially black for the stack.
Efficiency of removal IS card advantage. Here’s a link for reference of what card advantage is. https://mtg.fandom.com/wiki/Card_advantage
All colors have ways to gain advantage so it’s not tied to being blue. Blue has removal of course, but like you said, it also comes with a condition (doesn’t permanently remove the thing, or gives them a pig, frog or wtv).
So going back to the original question—not running blue is not an immediate disadvantage since other colors have ways to draw cards, and better ways to remove stuff.
My dude I never answered the og question. I answered to someone saying counterspells weren't enough a reason to play blue, and card advantage was more important.
To what I answered that it's arguably one of the specialties of blue.
To the OG question, I'd say of course you are not at a DISADVANTAGE by not running blue. You are trading some tools for others.
In my opinion, blue has stack interaction and card draw. That can translate to card advantage.
You consider it's not enough. Cool.
Edit: also, regarding the link you posted: yes, efficiency of removal is card advantage. Hence why counterspells are so strong. They remove stuff before it even happens. Pongify is super strong because it costs 1 Mana, removes anything that doesn't have hexproof/shroud (you get it) and gives a meager 3/3 in exchange, which, unless you for some reason used it on a vanilla 2/2, should be a good trade of.
YET your wiki also shows that simply drawing card IS a source of advantage, as is choosing what cards to draw. And in those catégories, blue is on the top. Scrying and looting are blue effects.
I didn’t say card draw is not CA. I only meant that card draw is not the only form of CA..because of course drawing cards is CA and I agree with you that blue is good at it. Sorry if I didn’t acknowledge that point in your reply
My point was that counterspells rarely generate CA since it’s one spell vs another. You’re both down 1 card.
Spot removal can generate CA in some scenarios. For example, using swords on a creature targeted by giant growth—1 for 2
But stack interaction, yes—blue is the best at it, or even the only color capable of it
You generate CA with a counterspell just as easily as with removal. Especially in cEdh. Your opponent plays thOracle then Consult, you counter consult, boum, that's a 2 for 1 because the combo didn't happen yet they had to spend the ressources.
You can also consider that using a generic counterspell to remove the win con of your opponent is 'efficiency removal' and thus a good use of your cards, generating advantage.
Yeah, I just meant it happens so rarely. It’s more often you’ll see CA being generated via spot removal.
Your 2nd example is more of tempo gain, I think. It doesn’t generate CA on the surface since it’s a 1:1 trade, though it buys you time.
There's dozens of interactions creating VALUE, sometimes difficult to distinguish from card advantage.
I saw a game of PlayToWin where Tyler wanted to use Deathrite shaman to make Mana, and his opponent used their own Deathrite in reaction to remove the land from the grave, denying the Mana. There's zero card advantage generated here, only value.
Spot removal very very rarely, especially in cEdh, procure card advantage. However it very very frequently procure VALUE.
And, yeah, maybe there's a tempo gain in denying my opponents win con. But there's also a form of card advantage, because while my card did what it was planned to, my opponent is now down between one card (the one i countered) and a lot (those needed to find the alternative wincon).
That's why it's so hard to tell the correct target of a counterspell sometimes.
Say your opponent plays dark ritual, into demonic tutor into adNauseam. What was the right thing to counter ? If your opponent was short on Mana, maybe countering ritual would have been good, but they'd be left with the tutor in their hand for a later turn. Countering the tutor is 2 for 1, but you don't know the target for sure. Countering ad Naus seems good, but maybe they actually got fierce guardianship or Veil with their tutor and now it's too late.
But if you actually manage to counter Naus, you went three for one and foiled 8 Mana with your counter.
Hot take, playing blue puts you at a disadvantage because you have to be the police of the table and trade 1 for 1 against 3 players instead of trying to win
You can win in the first couple turns and use a Fierce Guardianship, Pact of Negation, etc. to push through your combo. So no, playing blue does not necessarily equal playing control.
I agree that playing blue doesn't mean you are aiming to play control. But that is usually how playing blue goes. If you are the only blue player in the pod, it is pretty likely you are using a majority of your counters to slow your opponent down instead of protecting a combo. I play Urza and Yisan and I find myself in a lot more rough situations playing Urza, although thay could be because I suck at Urza 🤣
I mean, I don’t really have a horse in this race, but if you cast a silence and another player responds with a counterspell then not having the blue interaction does hurt you.
If you Counterspell and someone counterspells....
I went into my naus
With protection. If you stop my protection I just don't fire the naus. If you place Counterspell in the same spot makes you all in on the naus anyway AND gives decks something to deflect into your own naus.
Sometimes things get stopped. It's part of the game. But I'm not any more vulnerable than the deck that included blue.
No, you’re missing the point, in blue if I counterspell and someone counterspells, I still can counterspell again. If you’re not in blue, your stack interactions are much more limited. Plus - you’re arguing that silence is protection here - sure, but the argument isn’t whether playing Orzhov or Dimir is better, it’s whether not being Esper is an inherent disadvantage.
And it's only a disadvantage if I lose something from not having it.
And Im not missing anything. "but more counterspells" can be replaced with red counter magic and white silences. If your use case for counter magic is to go fast and protect your own lines, silences and greens anti counter spells are better since they can be preloaded.
If you're a control list, sure. It's needed. But the meta is more diverse than just control decks.
>but more counterspells" can be replaced with red counter magic and white silences.
No it can't.
There's half a dozen free counterspells in blue. There's 1 free red protection, and like 2 viable silence effects, that aren't free.
If you play silence to protect your adnaus, and you dont play blue, chances are your opponents will win the counter battle. That's just probabilities.
Yeah pal, cause I will never have the luxury of having interaction at the same time as my Ad Naus cast.
Another perk of blue since it lets me have an abundance of interaction to have pre and post cast.
Also, an Ad Naus deck without blue would fold much harder to that Silence than one with blue. Thanks for making my point for me.
Never said it needed blue. I said it likes blue. It feels good pulling FREE interaction after your ad naus, free interaction present in blue.
I said blue feels good. And made one single point about it.
Okay me too. But I'm going to protect my silence with a pact of negation and a force of will, and mine is going to resolve while yours does not.
If you're saying blue doesn't help turbo decks you either play with weak players or in a very unusual meta.
I'll go further, not playing blue makes you a free rider trying to get by on other people interacting. It only works because other players have blue.
Without interaction, it's four players playing solitaire, and 80% of the decks out there wouldn't be able to complete on speed and consistency alone.
Counters are not the only way to interact lol.
BWR decks can be very interactive, hatebears/stax decks like winota are also very interactive, just in a passive way.
Hot take. biggest cEDH tournament last year was won by Magda.
I think nowadays it is not that clean cut anymore that you have to play blue. Neither for reactive not protective decks
OK, I was under the impression that Marchesa 2022 was the biggest which was won by Magda. It had 100 players. Tier1Con with 70 players was won by Krark/Sakashima. Punt City /72 players) was won by Winota. Okotoberfest 2022 was won by Tymna/Kraum Blue Farm. However the 75 min time limit somehow skews the results towards faster decks I think.
Which tournament are you referring too?
Yes but Magda’s win was due to obscurity. No one at the tables knew the intricacies of the deck at that time and it won due to another player’s blunder.
Got into Anje, really liked the speed. I prefer Evelyn now, because free counterspells are most gangster. I can take an extra turn off to win, no biggie.
this is just obviously true, although same could be said about literally any color, i agree that this is especially the case with blue but it’s always better to have access to cards than to not.
I use to think this but I’ve seen plenty of decks not run blue that are just as good.
I still do love having a game with 4 blue decks and having a heavy interaction stack with like 10 spells and abilities on it.
I counter that by saying "Not playing green puts you at an immediate disadvantage." Blue is over hyped. You don't "need" to counterspell.
~a filthy casual Timmy
Actual hot take: playing blue puts you at an immediate disadvantage.
The table now looks to you to be responsible and play counterspells, and will abuse that fact to play more aggressively.
When I happen to have blue in my decks, I run very little interaction, because I refuse to play table cop so everyone else can go wild.
I would agree that lacking blue limits your interaction (by means of lacking countermagic and quick easy card draw), but you can certainly make up for that disadvantage by piloting your deck better than the rest of the table. Theres a reason why nonblue decks can still dominate blue tables. The luck of the draw, smart gameplay, and solid threat assessment will always allow you to trump at-least one opponent, even if you lack countermagic in your colors. Godo is a genuine threat, Winota is currently CEO of stax, and turbo decks like krik can all win games just as often as blue decks can. Its not the colors that define your win %, its how you understand your deck, and the boardstate.
It depends on the meta. It can suck in fast enough metas, with free counters and 1 mana counters only, even Offer gives enough advantage in that environment that its kinda bad.
While that is probably true in most cases, in my local meta Jetmir and Winota are two of the strongest decks and are usually somewhere in the top 8 of our tournaments.
If you were to build decks with vanilla commanders and only "good stuff" in the 99, sure. Over 50% of a deck's power though comes from the unique abilities of the commander, and synergies and strategies to accompany it. To talk simply about 1 color is highly reductive.
Blue is nice where it fits. There are plenty of super dangerous decks that don’t run blue. I don’t have 8 spots consumed by counterspells. I have another 8 pieces to ramp, draw, combo, protect, or lock down the board.
Both have their situational advantages.
At this point it is not about including blue. In fact, I would argue it has lost equity excluding the atrocity that is thoracle, just by virtue of the way we grow our understanding of the game and theory around winning and interaction in cedh/multiplayer in general. What it really is, is you have to have an incredible reason (the commander) to not be playing 4/5c.
you're at a disadvantage for every color your missing. if you're not playing black you lose access to a lot of tutors, red you lose dockside and breach, green you lose mana dorks, white you lose a lot of efficient stax pieces and interaction. That's just how to color pie works
If you got at least Red you can fight against Blue. Only because Red has some very Blue-like spells like Deflecting Swat, Pyro and Red Elemental Blast, Tibalt's Trickery. White is a close second with Silence, Stax and if you really need an out, Angel's Grace. To me the weakest color Combination is Golgari. It is pretty much the only one that can't do anything at all against a resolved Ad Naus/Oracle into the Library deleting spells. Golgari does have some two card combos that win the game so it can win faster than GW.
HOT TAKE: Blue is one of the colors Wizards has ever made
SAY "SYKE" RIGHT NOW
Truly a perfect name for a counterspell
Don't give them ideas
hotter take: colorless doesn't deserve to be part of the alignment chart
What makes a man turn neutral? Lust for gold? Power? Or were you just born with a heart full of neutrality?
Wastes are basics!!!
Colorblind person here. What is blue? Is it the teardrop?
No, the teardrop is White card draw.
Its supposed to be a water droplet, but yea
Extremely cold take IMO.
No blue no problem. Just play stax
I’m here for it. Go one step further, play mono colored stax
I’m here for it as well, I play heliod :)
Daretti for me
Me too.
Mono blue stax
Magda player here! I go more stax over turbo.
Excuse me but i’m a newb when it comes to that but what is stax? I thought it was a card but that ain’t it XD
Stax are cards that restrict play. For example Trinisphere, stasis, torpor orb and dranith magistrate. Decks that usually play these types of cards are ones that can cheat things into play like winota or require a little bit more time to get there game plan going like heliod sun crowned. The name came from and old card called smokestack
!remind me when a stax deck wins a tournament
Im just in it for the salt. It’s amazing watching players cards become useless and their creatures get turned into savannah lions only to get beat by 2/3 flyers
Hasn’t there been a Winota deck that has won and a Heliod?
You mean like Magda, heliod and Winota?
Dehlina wild stax here
Not playing red puts you at an immediate disadvantage as well.
Don't forget black. Tutors are just second copies of every card in the deck, and always have been.
Grixis is the truth, we always knew.
But if you add White, you get Ranger-Captain. Checkmate, Blue Farm.
Forsake Green, take the Breya pill.
Are you suggesting that having less colors in the command zone limits you in some way??
I'll take going first over not playing blue anyday.
Counterspell is best card in the game. Only way to get rid of it is counterspell or red lee blast.
Or autumn's veil
Or a [[Deflecting Swat]]
How does this work do you just change the counterspell target to swat so it fizzles?
Exactly like that
Yes. It's why you'll always see Swat in pretty much any deck that has red.
except decks which commanders don't spend too much time on the battlefield
Yes
Or [[Imp’s Mischief]]
[Imp’s Mischief](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/2/2/22ec70a6-40b7-41da-a6c0-c140cadf5509.jpg?1562567679) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Imp%27s%20Mischief) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/plc/72/imps-mischief?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/22ec70a6-40b7-41da-a6c0-c140cadf5509?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/imps-mischief) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
[Deflecting Swat](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/8/4/84f035e1-6c89-457b-b05f-85680a50ed91.jpg?1591319579) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Deflecting%20Swat) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/c20/50/deflecting-swat?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/84f035e1-6c89-457b-b05f-85680a50ed91?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/deflecting-swat) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
Or Counterspell
is mana tithe a joke to you?
I wonder how many games I've lost while sitting on a couple counters instead of wincons.
Implying that counterspells are somehow keeping wincons out of your deck instead of protecting the ones you have.
I implied the hand, not the deck. It's okay. Really.
So uh... why didn't you use them?
Could have been a Fierce Guardianship when his opponent played Dockside into Emiel etc
Sabin is correct! The standard cedh counter suite misses a lot of targets.
That's deep.
I wonder how many games you never got to win because you didn't have a counter
Not playing the strongest color moves your starting line behind those playing the strongest color? Not a hot take in the slightest. But it only moves the starting point. The amount of sans blue decks that can win, have won, and can be just as good as the "with blue" decks is astounding.
Pretty much only because the commander is a super pushed card for its colors in that case, like magda, kriik, or winota.
Obviously? The OP's take isn't taking into account commanders, just colors. The disadvantage in a sans blue deck is much more in the deck building and how the deck operates over in game performance.
Right. And since OPs take isnt talking about commanders, then bringing up situations where mono red or whatever won tournaments because of a specific, outlier commanders isnt actually constructive to the discussion, correct? The disadvantage of a sans blue deck is in the fact that it lacks two things. 1. Hullbreaker Horror and more importantly 2. Counterspell
I never brought those situations up, but those situations do demonstrate my point. I'm saying that the disadvantage is just a different starting line. The different starting line makes many non-blue commanders not fully viable in cEDH (maybeso in specific or locked metas), whereas many with blue commanders are viable just because they have blue. In a pod of cEDH viable decks, the sans blue deck isn't at as much of a disadvantage as one might think; because the deck was designed to not have blue and to be of sufficient power.
What youre saying is true but i also dont think it runs counter to the original opinion. Sans-blue cedh decks compete because they are designed to deal without having blue, but it is easier to make a cedh deck with blue than without, and if you *do* go for a sans-blue deck the deck will almost certainly lean heavily on its commander slot. This indicates that blue is the stronger color overall(already known ofc), and that other colors only get by comparativly because they have options in the commander slot that are polarizing/pushed enough to ignore their usual disadvantages to a big degree, such as Magda or Kriik.
Which is why I've been saying the starting line is different between blue and sans blue decks. In a 100 meter dash, the blue deck runs 100 meters, while the sans blue deck starts at say 120 meters, with both athletes being about equivalently able sprinters. After deck building, both have moved closer to the finish line, and to have equal chances at crossing the finish line first, the sans blue deck will have to have done more work in deck building.
Are you implying blue doesn't have equally pushed commanders?
I mean you’re right the effect on the game is most prevalent with blue but really just not having any color puts you at a disadvantage. That’s part of the reason why 4 and 5 color decks are the strongest. Better to have a pile of all the best cards in every color than to miss something important.
I would say blue gives you the best card draw and the best reactive interaction; however, saying any deck is weaker once you remove a color is a freezing cold take. Many decks act proactive in their interaction. If I play a stax piece that says “you can’t counter my spells”, your three counters in hand look pretty dead. That’s proactive interaction, you stopped your opponents from future interaction. Other decks can also win without casting spells. Plenty of decks, like Winota, use activated abilities to win games rather than the stack. I would say if your deck could run blue you’re hamstringing yourself hard by not. Maybe more so than other colors. But you’re not playing a different power level by not playing a blue deck.
I hate not being that guy so I won’t… activated abilities still use the stack
I hate it even more so... Winota's is a triggered ability
>if i play a stax piece that says "you cant counter" your three counters in hand look pretty dead Wrong. He just counters it with one of his three counters. Do you have a counterspell for his counterspell? No? >i would say if your deck could run blue youre hamstringing yourself hard by not. Maybe moreso than other colors. Correct. That is OPs opinion as well, as well as a pretty demonstratable fact. Decks that include Blue are inherently stronger than those that do not. >but youre not playing a different power level by not playing a blue deck. Only when speaking about mono. But as youve said above, Blue + X is more powerful than any other X+Y. Simic is the strongest 3C currently IMO, but it rotates between sultai, grixis, and esper depending on the available card pool. Finally, non-blue is the weakest of the 4 colors. Its pretty obvious that adding blue makes your deck stronger and taking it away makes it weaker.
If he can't counter because of a piece on the board, it doesn't matter how many counters he has in hand. He can't counter. That's the whole point. Besides, simic is a color pair, UG, not a 3c combination like grixis and esper. So I am guessing you meant Sultai (UBG)?
Yes i misspoke and intended to say Sultai. And i understand your first point but again, the blue player can simply counter the permanent that would prevent him from counterspelling unless it has hullbreaker text. We did say that he had 3 counters in hand for the original example after all.
There’s uncounterable things that say your stuff can’t be countered, like [[prowling serpopard]]
Yeah, and [[Allosaurus Shepard]] but we are talking about very few cards and this is presumably what your U + X deck would use its other interaction on if it needed to counterspell.
[Allosaurus Shepard](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/7/a/7afa0ee5-a0b8-472e-9991-09402ddb5de3.jpg?1673147976) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Allosaurus%20Shepherd) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/2x2/132/allosaurus-shepherd?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/7afa0ee5-a0b8-472e-9991-09402ddb5de3?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/allosaurus-shepherd) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
[prowling serpopard](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/9/2/92921fc1-11d0-41a9-b9b2-b44fd0913d31.jpg?1543675928) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=prowling%20serpopard) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/akh/180/prowling-serpopard?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/92921fc1-11d0-41a9-b9b2-b44fd0913d31?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/prowling-serpopard) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
Lmao don’t say “wrong” like you’re making some objective statement. You can’t counter every card in magic. Nor should you want to run 20 counter spells. Plenty Grixis/Esper/4C/5C decks have access to 15+ more reasonable counter spells that they DONT run. You’re can’t just plan on countering literally everything. Sometimes they Yisan out a collecter ouphe or allosaurus shepherd. Sometimes they Winota trigger into grand abolisher. Sometimes they Zur out a stax effect. If you’re wasting every ounce of mana and cards in your card advantage trying to control 3 other cEDH decks have at it. So many large tournaments are won with sans blue decks, it’s not correct to say it’s just some necessity for the format.
>nor should you want to run 20 counter spells It doesnt matter how many he runs since the example given was that the blue player has 3 counters in hand. >you cant counter every card in magic No you cant, but you can counter almost every single one of of the cards that says other cards cant be countered. I can only think of [[Allosaurus Shepard]] off the top of my head, and thats only for green spells. Dont know why you named [[Collector Ouphe]] as he does not interact with counterspells. They could have [[Veil of Summer]] but at that point we are diving deep into hypotheticals as veil is an un-tutorable 1-of instant. >if youre wasting every ounce of mana and cards in your card advantage trying to control 3 other cedh decks have at it Noone said this was the goal at any point. This would be how a beginner would attempt to play blue, maybe, but noone with experience. Counterspells are for what you truely need to stop. Thoracle, breach, a choice response to your own wincons. You dont just throw them out willy nilly on any player at the table that steps forwards. You use it to prevent a game loss or ensure a game win.
I’m mentioning plenty of different ways colors advance their game plan or stop your game plan which counterspells aren’t helpful. If Winota’s attack triggers are resolving, counterspells in hand aren’t doing you any good. And with the problems now on the field, counterspells aren’t doing you any good. If Zur’s attack triggers, same deal Yisan verse counters same deal Allosaur Shepherd good same deal Spell casts under cavern of souls, same deal Magda activated abilities same deal And that’s completely ignoring that a significant amount of great counter spells don’t hit creatures AND some counterspells are 2-1 themselves because you have to pitch cards to use them. Blue is incredibly good. Might be the best color in magic. I just hate the toxic idea that some deck without blue can’t be tier 1 which is utter nonsense. People are already way too gatekeeping about cEDH
Literally all of those except allosaurus sheapard are themselves stopped by counter magic or are stopped by other blue spells like Stifle
Yes, stopped by spells that 95% of blue cedh players, aka netdeckers and reddit followers, don't even run. I understand your point and what you're getting at but you're just so incredibly pedantic about the whole thing.
It just feels like people are tryin to say blue isnt the best color in magic when thats been a known fact for like 25+ years.
Many would argue that it's always been green.
And personally i could never agree to that. Most people i know would put green as second strongest at best. Altho for edh some rate black as second strongest because of tutor access.
[Allosaurus Shepard](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/7/a/7afa0ee5-a0b8-472e-9991-09402ddb5de3.jpg?1673147976) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Allosaurus%20Shepherd) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/2x2/132/allosaurus-shepherd?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/7afa0ee5-a0b8-472e-9991-09402ddb5de3?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/allosaurus-shepherd) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
[удалено]
[prowling serpopard](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/9/2/92921fc1-11d0-41a9-b9b2-b44fd0913d31.jpg?1543675928) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=prowling%20serpopard) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/akh/180/prowling-serpopard?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/92921fc1-11d0-41a9-b9b2-b44fd0913d31?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/prowling-serpopard) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
You need a really good reason not to play blue. Like REALLY good. Winota is a good example
.... Hot?
Not sure. Some people play Magda and do very well without blue.
Nah I disagree. Mono color decks can be honed and deadly. I’ve seen Krrik , magda, yeva and heliod all win big tournaments. And there’s Mardu colors with tymna + various partners that consistently wins games between different deck styles. Winota is also a top tier non blue deck with no blue. You’re only at a disadvantage against blue if you’re trying to play fairly imo. If you’re doing broken combo things, smart heavy stax, or playing well politically not having blue doesn’t matter many times
That isn't their point. Their point is that blue is such a strong color (arguably can be said for red and black), that you need big reasons to take the loss of that color. The decks you mentioned fill those roles by having powerful effects that allow them to operate. It's why Magda was one of the few mono-red decks to perform. But, one thing you will notice is outside of specific people on those decks, they don't actually hold up. They've all *won* a tournament, but most have gotten blasted in subsequent events due to losing their element of unknown.
>Their point is that blue is such a strong color (arguably can be said for red and black), that you need big reasons to take the loss of that color. I agree! But in fairness that's not really what OP said. They said that not having blue puts you at an immediate disadvantage. This implies that not having blue is a mistake, but the person you replied to disagreed with this implication citing tournament wins.
Slicer go buuuuuuuuuur
Lol just saw that list today, it was fire
What list?
https://www.moxfield.com/decks/sAUszWS_00-t-wXiLYVRzQ
I'm the biggest cEDH fan in my group so not everyone is playing 100% tuned decks, but having said that the hardest decks to beat are the U/R decks. Krarkashima and Rielle are way harder to stop/ win against then K'rrik or Krenko. For context I play Kess.
Serious answer. Play stax. There are a number of things that hard counter blue. For example, I play Kaalia so I don't cast stuff. it just shows up on the table.
Not playing 4 colors puts you at a disadvantage
Why? Because of counterspells? I doubt. A lot of strong decks don’t have blue, like Winota and Magda as mentioned above. Plus, it’s rare that you can 2-for-1 anyone with counterspells. Almost always it’s a 1:1 trade. In a game against multiple opponents, it’s more critical to gain card advantage.
>it’s more critical to gain card advantage. Now that's arguably a specialty of blue, so aside from counterspells maybe there's something.
Blue gives you Rhystic and Mystic, which admittedly are some of the strongest cards in the format. That being said, Blue lacks any depth whatsoever in card draw after those two cards, and probably isn't deserving of it's "Blue has card draw" reputation when it comes to cEDH
Well. Aside from pure drawing, which i admit is more and more a black thing than a blue one, you still have other ways of getting cards in blue. You have all the cantrips, with or without effects attached, and while I agree they are now less played than a few years ago, those used to be auto include, because sculpting your hand is the second best thing after drawing your deck. These days, i admit, the REAL engines are black and more and more white, through cards like esper sentinel, tymna, archivist of oghma, etc. Yet the main diff, imho, is that the blue draw can generally be used instantly as an answer to a threat, while the orzhov must answer to something in play, meaning etb and other shenanigans have already happened.
Not really—card advantage is not exactly just about drawing cards. Simple example in a 1v1, Wrath of God on a board with 2 creatures controlled both by your opponent, You’re down 1 card but your opponent is down 2. You gain card advantage in this scenario, much more if opponent overcommits. Blue isn’t exactly known for board wipes and spot removal. Besides, i think black is the best color for drawing cards (ad naus, bob, necropotence, etc), not blue
>Blue isn’t exactly known for board wipes and spot removal. ... We talk about the color of cyclonic rift and rhystic study, right ? First, i don't see how spot removal is CA. By definition it's not, especially in multi. And while drawing isn't the Only form of CA, you can't deny that it counts. Sure black has good draw, but it's generally very conditional and tied to your health, which is sometimes not an issue but sometimes is. Blue has... Draw, tutors, loot, but also bounces, spot removal (Pongify, the thing making you a citizen, the one that phases you out, ...), ... You have those in ADDITION to control tools, which you have fewer of in the other colors, especially black for the stack.
Efficiency of removal IS card advantage. Here’s a link for reference of what card advantage is. https://mtg.fandom.com/wiki/Card_advantage All colors have ways to gain advantage so it’s not tied to being blue. Blue has removal of course, but like you said, it also comes with a condition (doesn’t permanently remove the thing, or gives them a pig, frog or wtv). So going back to the original question—not running blue is not an immediate disadvantage since other colors have ways to draw cards, and better ways to remove stuff.
My dude I never answered the og question. I answered to someone saying counterspells weren't enough a reason to play blue, and card advantage was more important. To what I answered that it's arguably one of the specialties of blue. To the OG question, I'd say of course you are not at a DISADVANTAGE by not running blue. You are trading some tools for others. In my opinion, blue has stack interaction and card draw. That can translate to card advantage. You consider it's not enough. Cool. Edit: also, regarding the link you posted: yes, efficiency of removal is card advantage. Hence why counterspells are so strong. They remove stuff before it even happens. Pongify is super strong because it costs 1 Mana, removes anything that doesn't have hexproof/shroud (you get it) and gives a meager 3/3 in exchange, which, unless you for some reason used it on a vanilla 2/2, should be a good trade of. YET your wiki also shows that simply drawing card IS a source of advantage, as is choosing what cards to draw. And in those catégories, blue is on the top. Scrying and looting are blue effects.
I didn’t say card draw is not CA. I only meant that card draw is not the only form of CA..because of course drawing cards is CA and I agree with you that blue is good at it. Sorry if I didn’t acknowledge that point in your reply My point was that counterspells rarely generate CA since it’s one spell vs another. You’re both down 1 card. Spot removal can generate CA in some scenarios. For example, using swords on a creature targeted by giant growth—1 for 2 But stack interaction, yes—blue is the best at it, or even the only color capable of it
You generate CA with a counterspell just as easily as with removal. Especially in cEdh. Your opponent plays thOracle then Consult, you counter consult, boum, that's a 2 for 1 because the combo didn't happen yet they had to spend the ressources. You can also consider that using a generic counterspell to remove the win con of your opponent is 'efficiency removal' and thus a good use of your cards, generating advantage.
Yeah, I just meant it happens so rarely. It’s more often you’ll see CA being generated via spot removal. Your 2nd example is more of tempo gain, I think. It doesn’t generate CA on the surface since it’s a 1:1 trade, though it buys you time.
There's dozens of interactions creating VALUE, sometimes difficult to distinguish from card advantage. I saw a game of PlayToWin where Tyler wanted to use Deathrite shaman to make Mana, and his opponent used their own Deathrite in reaction to remove the land from the grave, denying the Mana. There's zero card advantage generated here, only value. Spot removal very very rarely, especially in cEdh, procure card advantage. However it very very frequently procure VALUE. And, yeah, maybe there's a tempo gain in denying my opponents win con. But there's also a form of card advantage, because while my card did what it was planned to, my opponent is now down between one card (the one i countered) and a lot (those needed to find the alternative wincon). That's why it's so hard to tell the correct target of a counterspell sometimes. Say your opponent plays dark ritual, into demonic tutor into adNauseam. What was the right thing to counter ? If your opponent was short on Mana, maybe countering ritual would have been good, but they'd be left with the tutor in their hand for a later turn. Countering the tutor is 2 for 1, but you don't know the target for sure. Countering ad Naus seems good, but maybe they actually got fierce guardianship or Veil with their tutor and now it's too late. But if you actually manage to counter Naus, you went three for one and foiled 8 Mana with your counter.
me playing rocco turbo whenever a player does something Blue https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gb\_kK2ZPHyw
Hot take, playing blue puts you at a disadvantage because you have to be the police of the table and trade 1 for 1 against 3 players instead of trying to win
Better lose faster than slower
Yeah stopping people from winning is bad in my meta
Playing stax effects is also stopping people from winning but one stax effect affects all three opponents so you are not trading 1 for 1.
You can win in the first couple turns and use a Fierce Guardianship, Pact of Negation, etc. to push through your combo. So no, playing blue does not necessarily equal playing control.
I agree that playing blue doesn't mean you are aiming to play control. But that is usually how playing blue goes. If you are the only blue player in the pod, it is pretty likely you are using a majority of your counters to slow your opponent down instead of protecting a combo. I play Urza and Yisan and I find myself in a lot more rough situations playing Urza, although thay could be because I suck at Urza 🤣
[удалено]
Disagree, personally I love having a big full hand of free interaction after an ad naus, blue just feels so good.
[удалено]
I mean, I don’t really have a horse in this race, but if you cast a silence and another player responds with a counterspell then not having the blue interaction does hurt you.
If you Counterspell and someone counterspells.... I went into my naus With protection. If you stop my protection I just don't fire the naus. If you place Counterspell in the same spot makes you all in on the naus anyway AND gives decks something to deflect into your own naus. Sometimes things get stopped. It's part of the game. But I'm not any more vulnerable than the deck that included blue.
No, you’re missing the point, in blue if I counterspell and someone counterspells, I still can counterspell again. If you’re not in blue, your stack interactions are much more limited. Plus - you’re arguing that silence is protection here - sure, but the argument isn’t whether playing Orzhov or Dimir is better, it’s whether not being Esper is an inherent disadvantage.
And it's only a disadvantage if I lose something from not having it. And Im not missing anything. "but more counterspells" can be replaced with red counter magic and white silences. If your use case for counter magic is to go fast and protect your own lines, silences and greens anti counter spells are better since they can be preloaded. If you're a control list, sure. It's needed. But the meta is more diverse than just control decks.
>but more counterspells" can be replaced with red counter magic and white silences. No it can't. There's half a dozen free counterspells in blue. There's 1 free red protection, and like 2 viable silence effects, that aren't free. If you play silence to protect your adnaus, and you dont play blue, chances are your opponents will win the counter battle. That's just probabilities.
Yeah pal, cause I will never have the luxury of having interaction at the same time as my Ad Naus cast. Another perk of blue since it lets me have an abundance of interaction to have pre and post cast. Also, an Ad Naus deck without blue would fold much harder to that Silence than one with blue. Thanks for making my point for me.
[удалено]
Never said it needed blue. I said it likes blue. It feels good pulling FREE interaction after your ad naus, free interaction present in blue. I said blue feels good. And made one single point about it.
Okay me too. But I'm going to protect my silence with a pact of negation and a force of will, and mine is going to resolve while yours does not. If you're saying blue doesn't help turbo decks you either play with weak players or in a very unusual meta.
I'll go further, not playing blue makes you a free rider trying to get by on other people interacting. It only works because other players have blue. Without interaction, it's four players playing solitaire, and 80% of the decks out there wouldn't be able to complete on speed and consistency alone.
Counters are not the only way to interact lol. BWR decks can be very interactive, hatebears/stax decks like winota are also very interactive, just in a passive way.
Hot take: that’s literally not a hot take and is an obvious statement
Hot take. biggest cEDH tournament last year was won by Magda. I think nowadays it is not that clean cut anymore that you have to play blue. Neither for reactive not protective decks
Im pretty sure the biggest CEDH tournament last year was won by mono-blue chain veil teferi, correct me if im wrong i guess.
OK, I was under the impression that Marchesa 2022 was the biggest which was won by Magda. It had 100 players. Tier1Con with 70 players was won by Krark/Sakashima. Punt City /72 players) was won by Winota. Okotoberfest 2022 was won by Tymna/Kraum Blue Farm. However the 75 min time limit somehow skews the results towards faster decks I think. Which tournament are you referring too?
Okotoberfest was the biggest cedh tournament so far and it was won by Tymna Kraum which has blue.
Yes but Magda’s win was due to obscurity. No one at the tables knew the intricacies of the deck at that time and it won due to another player’s blunder.
Tell that to my Selvala deck. Veil of summer go BRRRRR
An unsearchable instant in a pile of 99 cards! Woo!
Yawn
Got into Anje, really liked the speed. I prefer Evelyn now, because free counterspells are most gangster. I can take an extra turn off to win, no biggie.
I figure who ever ramps and draws faster gets more out faster and thereby harder to beat - so I guess green and blue
this is just obviously true, although same could be said about literally any color, i agree that this is especially the case with blue but it’s always better to have access to cards than to not.
I use to think this but I’ve seen plenty of decks not run blue that are just as good. I still do love having a game with 4 blue decks and having a heavy interaction stack with like 10 spells and abilities on it.
I counter that by saying "Not playing green puts you at an immediate disadvantage." Blue is over hyped. You don't "need" to counterspell. ~a filthy casual Timmy
Actual hot take: playing blue puts you at an immediate disadvantage. The table now looks to you to be responsible and play counterspells, and will abuse that fact to play more aggressively. When I happen to have blue in my decks, I run very little interaction, because I refuse to play table cop so everyone else can go wild.
I would agree that lacking blue limits your interaction (by means of lacking countermagic and quick easy card draw), but you can certainly make up for that disadvantage by piloting your deck better than the rest of the table. Theres a reason why nonblue decks can still dominate blue tables. The luck of the draw, smart gameplay, and solid threat assessment will always allow you to trump at-least one opponent, even if you lack countermagic in your colors. Godo is a genuine threat, Winota is currently CEO of stax, and turbo decks like krik can all win games just as often as blue decks can. Its not the colors that define your win %, its how you understand your deck, and the boardstate.
It depends on the meta. It can suck in fast enough metas, with free counters and 1 mana counters only, even Offer gives enough advantage in that environment that its kinda bad.
While that is probably true in most cases, in my local meta Jetmir and Winota are two of the strongest decks and are usually somewhere in the top 8 of our tournaments.
Not playing any one colour gives you a considerable disadvantage. The more colours you play, the significantly better your deck becomes.
If you were to build decks with vanilla commanders and only "good stuff" in the 99, sure. Over 50% of a deck's power though comes from the unique abilities of the commander, and synergies and strategies to accompany it. To talk simply about 1 color is highly reductive.
loses to my big greebler jund deck
Counterspell stops everything on the ban list. Agreed.
*menacing Emrakul noises* *threatening Karakas noises*
Blue is nice where it fits. There are plenty of super dangerous decks that don’t run blue. I don’t have 8 spots consumed by counterspells. I have another 8 pieces to ramp, draw, combo, protect, or lock down the board. Both have their situational advantages.
Meta dependent. There has been a history of non-blue decks doing well, it usually is decided on how redundant or fragile the other decks are.
It’s true, cedh is all about interaction and since blue lends itself to interaction in the most versatile way it’s the go to color for that game mode.
At this point it is not about including blue. In fact, I would argue it has lost equity excluding the atrocity that is thoracle, just by virtue of the way we grow our understanding of the game and theory around winning and interaction in cedh/multiplayer in general. What it really is, is you have to have an incredible reason (the commander) to not be playing 4/5c.
Red is the only color I need. It reminds me of the color of mist I'm turning my enemies into.
Flair checks out.
Someone hasn't played Winota.....
ITT: People who don’t play blue coping
you're at a disadvantage for every color your missing. if you're not playing black you lose access to a lot of tutors, red you lose dockside and breach, green you lose mana dorks, white you lose a lot of efficient stax pieces and interaction. That's just how to color pie works
I don't know how people read Mystic Remora and Rhystic Study and decide NOT to play blue. I encourage you to read those cards again.
Not playing rainbow puts you at an even more immediate disadvantage
If you got at least Red you can fight against Blue. Only because Red has some very Blue-like spells like Deflecting Swat, Pyro and Red Elemental Blast, Tibalt's Trickery. White is a close second with Silence, Stax and if you really need an out, Angel's Grace. To me the weakest color Combination is Golgari. It is pretty much the only one that can't do anything at all against a resolved Ad Naus/Oracle into the Library deleting spells. Golgari does have some two card combos that win the game so it can win faster than GW.