Jump to content

Been a while...


Frozen Judgment

Recommended Posts

[align=Center]Since I made a card that is.

 

84866.jpg

 

[spoiler=Lore]This card cannot be Normal Summoned or Set. This card can only be Special Summoned during the End Phase of a turn where 4 or more monsters were destroyed. While this card is face-up on the field, whenever a monster is destroyed, remove it from play instead. This card gains 100 ATK for each monster removed from play this way. Once per turn, you can Special Summon 1 monster that was removed from play this way to its owner's field. If you do, you must remove from play 1 card from the owner of the Special Summoned monster's field. You can Special Summon up to 4 removed from play monsters to your opponent's field to have this card gain 1 additional attack this turn equal to the amount of monsters you Special Summoned to your opponent's field.

[/align]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trust me, that's a generous rating from a higher-up. I'll bold the errors:

 

This card cannot be Normal Summoned or Set. This card can only be Special Summoned during the End Phase of a turn where 4 or more monsters were destroyed. While this card is face-up on the field, whenever a monster is destroyed, remove it from play instead. This card gains 100 ATK for each monster removed from play this way. Once per turn, you can Special Summon 1 monster that was removed from play this way to its owner's field. If you do, you must remove from play 1 card from the owner of the Special Summoned monster's field. You can Special Summon up to 4 removed from play monsters to your opponent's field to have this card gain 1 additional attack this turn equal to the amount of monsters you Special Summoned to your opponent's field.

 

First bold: "instead", grammatically, isn't needed here. It's implying taking one route over another, when the first route is never specified. Simply add "and sent to the Graveyard" after "destroyed" and it's good.

 

Second bold: "Amount" isn't a reference to game mechanic anymore. Hasn't been since PSV. "A number of" seems to have replaced it somehow.

 

 

Hmm. I realized, if you flood your opponent's field with monsters, and if it's ATK is 2000 or higher, it'll gain 4 additional attacks, allowing you to OTK your opponent after a Lightning Vortex. Not OP'd due to the summoning difficulty, but probably it's most effective use.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trust me' date=' that's a generous rating from a higher-up. I'll bold the errors:

 

[i']This card cannot be Normal Summoned or Set. This card can only be Special Summoned during the End Phase of a turn where 4 or more monsters were destroyed. While this card is face-up on the field, whenever a monster is destroyed, remove it from play instead. This card gains 100 ATK for each monster removed from play this way. Once per turn, you can Special Summon 1 monster that was removed from play this way to its owner's field. If you do, you must remove from play 1 card from the owner of the Special Summoned monster's field. You can Special Summon up to 4 removed from play monsters to your opponent's field to have this card gain 1 additional attack this turn equal to the amount of monsters you Special Summoned to your opponent's field.[/i]

 

First bold: "instead", grammatically, isn't needed here. It's implying taking one route over another, when the first route is never specified. Simply add "and sent to the Graveyard" after "destroyed" and it's good.

 

Second bold: "Amount" isn't a reference to game mechanic anymore. Hasn't been since PSV. "A number of" seems to have replaced it somehow.

 

 

Hmm. I realized, if you flood your opponent's field with monsters, and if it's ATK is 2000 or higher, it'll gain 4 additional attacks, allowing you to OTK your opponent after a Lightning Vortex. Not OP'd due to the summoning difficulty, but probably it's most effective use.

 

"higher-up"? I've gotten 9 and aboves from 5 and 6 stars... -_- "Amount" is still considered correct. Not everyone uses new OCG you know. Point taken about the "instead". Thanks for pointing that out. But still, how on earth are those mistakes worth 6.7?

 

@DHPlasma

 

Please provide reasons for your rates.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"higher-up"? I've gotten 9 and aboves from 5 and 6 stars... -_-

Keep in mind' date=' this IS YCM. It's not exactly a barrel of gems. Lol.[/b']

 

"Amount" is still considered correct. Not everyone uses new OCG you know.

Then why did you ask for fixes? You're not implying you're one of those people, are you? No, you couldn't be.

 

Point taken about the "instead". Thanks for pointing that out. But still, how on earth are those mistakes worth 6.7?

Because I've seen way better. My standards are excellent. Don't feel bad, everyone gets a poor review at some point. Even me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...